Ishmael Reed is a conspiratorist
2nd blog post for this section because I have no other homework to do. So why not talk about Mumbo Jumbo? Gotta stay productive.
On the notion of Ishmael Reed being a conspiracy theorist. Because he 100% is. Throughout the entire book he develops an almost crazed persona- talking about how the Atonists are scheming to take down Jes Grew. He has an entire "partial bibliography" where he cites his sources. Except... this isn't an academic paper. Or is it? You see more books of fiction don't have sources... and if they do have sources they don't cite them. Because who cares. It's a book of fiction. Your research about how this species of tiger has 72 stripes instead of 71 doesn't matter in a book of fiction- because if you're wrong then it's just considered artistic liberty. So clearly, Reed here is tryna prove a point.
That point is that Jes Grew exists... and was simply covered up by the Atonists. You see, for the reason that he's arguing the existence of a phenomenon that was then covered up by some elaborate secret society organization-- I think there's plenty of reasoning there why Reed is quite clearly a conspiracy theorist. I don't think he's necessarily wrong- either- but that's not the point in why I'm writing here. His arguments are sound, he connects a ton of logic and reasoning throughout his story. It makes sense, I won't argue with his claims.
Reed here, sorta like Doctorow, uses actual history and connects his theory of what actually happened into real life. Thus, this is considered historical fiction. Because for all we know these stories are completely made up. He cites different events- namely Hoover being an "anti-jes-grew president" and citing his actual campaign speech to back this up. He cites Sigmund Freud (seriously why is Freud in another book for this class, what on earth?) coming to America as a test to "evaluate" jes grew's affect on the civillians. He cites the lack of information on America's involvement in Haiti are an example of how the Atonist's interference on the media. When you look at each of his arguments-- they make sense.
His arguments fit together really well. During the first of the 52 chapter (some of this is in chapter 51) he talks about how the atonists hunted the buffalo to stop the spread of Osiris's influence. To me, this read a lot like how the white americans had hunted the bison to drive out the native americans. Before that- he talks about how they were anticipating the extinction of a variety of species from Hawaii, Ethiopia, and a couple of american southern states. Hawaii namely is an area that was taken over by american (or should I say Atonist) influence, many of the indigenous people being kicked out to make room for the spread of white influence. These extinct/endangered species seem to be a way of referencing areas where the atonists had wiped out populations of people. Destroying culture.
Reed throughout the entire book suggests the conspiracy of the Atonists to destroy non-white culture. He tracks it down to the time of Moses, citing his sources. Be it Jes Grew is or is not an actual thing- Reed perpetuates his theory of an Atonist realm of influence seeking to destroy African culture from its roots; a story that has been perpetuated through history for too many years to count.
I really like Reed's use of real-world evidence (perhaps even more than Doctorow's, although Doctorow's writing style is overall more enjoyable to me). The whole book is so chaotic and messy and hard to follow, and these little scraps of reality feel kind of grounding. And Reed's presentation of the evidence definitely feels conspiratorial in a way that Doctorow's doesn't. Doctorow writes it pretty plainly and without embellishment, like a historian. Reed writes it like an urgently whispered aside, an induction into a radical new school of thought.
ReplyDeleteReed definitely makes you feel like you're trapped in a basement with a crazy person as they ramble on about their crazy conspiratorial theory. But as you look into modern day culture, it's hard not to have a thought in the back of your head whispering "this is basically modern day atonism" or something of the like. And all of the connections seem to make sense if you can accept his logic. I also like the comparison between Reed and Doctorow as I definitely think Doctorow feels more like a historian. Good post!
ReplyDelete(Reed not only includes Freud as a character--as does Doctorow, as you note--they both specifically focus on Freud's famous visit to the U.S. in 1909, and his famous "great mistake" quote. Freud is central to Reed's thesis, maybe more than in Doctorow's novel, as an "Atonist" who has redefined "demonic possession" etc. as "neurosis" etc., which in Reed's view is one more way of associating elements of Jes Grew with shame and moralism. And he also dangles the fascinating possibility of a meet-up with PaPa LaBas, who apparently tried to meet Freud but was kept away. Reed actually eschews the kind of "worlds collide" fictional meet-up that Doctorow loves to do.)
ReplyDelete