Invisible Man Rhetorical Analysis
Empty Rhetoric and Theory in Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man Invisible Man, Ralph Ellison’s seminal work, is the first person narrative of an unnamed African-American protagonist who falls victim to various forces throughout his journey. Despite the novel’s reputation as a racial work, it is also a bildungsroman in which the narrator struggles to understand the nature of his existence. The philosophical overtones of the novel gain clarity when analyzed in tandem with a relevant motif: that of empty or impractical rhetoric—from the mouths of those around him and later himself. The narrator’s recurrent interactions with such idealistic rhetoric and theory shift from blind acceptance to awareness, and eventually to revolt. His altering attitudes
…show more content…
A key connection exists between the “little Cartesian dolls” and one of Clifton’s Sambo dolls that the protagonist has held onto. It represents his need for proof, which he abandons, saying, “I felt for the doll in the shadow and dropped it on the desk” (Ellison 478). Like the doll of Kierkegaard does the improbable and “stands on its head” once the burden of proof is released, so does the narrator’s attitude toward the Brotherhood contort itself as he lets go of Clifton’s doll and distances himself from Sambo i.e. the uncomfortable nature of the Absurd. Instead, he lets go of that pain and leaps in faith to the “existence” of a world in which the Brotherhood’s ideals and rhetoric apply. This is why he continues to defend the Brotherhood against the accusations of Ras the Destroyer, who tries to destroy his faith. Fully understanding the absurdity of his own words, the protagonist, speaking of Clifton, claims that the organization is “determined that his death shall be the beginning of profound and lasting changes … to create something lasting of his death takes time and careful planning” (Ellison 480). The narrator has seen the futility of trying to create “profound and lasting changes,” and he knows that he is spouting the empty rhetoric and theory that has thus far controlled him through promises of “lasting,” historically, through “careful planning.” …show more content…
Soon after re-entering Harlem with an awareness of the Absurd, the narrator dons green-tinted sunglasses and a hat. In doing so, he accidentally assumes the identity of a con artist named Rinehart, who has multiple identities within the city. His experience as Rinehart undermines his idealistic faith because he is forced to confront the existence of a man who has found an identity through absolute freedom and deception. It brings him to a realization of the freedom of action he could have without a devotion to the Absurd. The narrator reflects, “The world in which we lived was without boundaries”; he also sees the inadequacy of faith in the Brotherhood’s rhetoric: “What did their theory tell them of such a world?” (498). Throughout his entire life the protagonist has been slave to abstract theory he does not recognize is absurd, and upon becoming aware, a brief stint as Rinehart is all that is necessary to open his eyes to possibility, an entire world that the Brotherhood’s “theory” is blind to. Rinehart’s freedom, therefore, is one force that pulls him away from his Kierkegaardian faith. It broadens his perspective. A more destructive force is his encounter with Brother Hambro, whom he speaks to in a final attempt to shed
A key connection exists between the “little Cartesian dolls” and one of Clifton’s Sambo dolls that the protagonist has held onto. It represents his need for proof, which he abandons, saying, “I felt for the doll in the shadow and dropped it on the desk” (Ellison 478). Like the doll of Kierkegaard does the improbable and “stands on its head” once the burden of proof is released, so does the narrator’s attitude toward the Brotherhood contort itself as he lets go of Clifton’s doll and distances himself from Sambo i.e. the uncomfortable nature of the Absurd. Instead, he lets go of that pain and leaps in faith to the “existence” of a world in which the Brotherhood’s ideals and rhetoric apply. This is why he continues to defend the Brotherhood against the accusations of Ras the Destroyer, who tries to destroy his faith. Fully understanding the absurdity of his own words, the protagonist, speaking of Clifton, claims that the organization is “determined that his death shall be the beginning of profound and lasting changes … to create something lasting of his death takes time and careful planning” (Ellison 480). The narrator has seen the futility of trying to create “profound and lasting changes,” and he knows that he is spouting the empty rhetoric and theory that has thus far controlled him through promises of “lasting,” historically, through “careful planning.” …show more content…
Soon after re-entering Harlem with an awareness of the Absurd, the narrator dons green-tinted sunglasses and a hat. In doing so, he accidentally assumes the identity of a con artist named Rinehart, who has multiple identities within the city. His experience as Rinehart undermines his idealistic faith because he is forced to confront the existence of a man who has found an identity through absolute freedom and deception. It brings him to a realization of the freedom of action he could have without a devotion to the Absurd. The narrator reflects, “The world in which we lived was without boundaries”; he also sees the inadequacy of faith in the Brotherhood’s rhetoric: “What did their theory tell them of such a world?” (498). Throughout his entire life the protagonist has been slave to abstract theory he does not recognize is absurd, and upon becoming aware, a brief stint as Rinehart is all that is necessary to open his eyes to possibility, an entire world that the Brotherhood’s “theory” is blind to. Rinehart’s freedom, therefore, is one force that pulls him away from his Kierkegaardian faith. It broadens his perspective. A more destructive force is his encounter with Brother Hambro, whom he speaks to in a final attempt to shed