The Novel As Counter-Phyllison Analysis
4. The Novel as Counter-Narrative
After having shown that Ellison challenges dominant historiography by showcasing how the black individual's experience can contest it, one question remains: How can historiography not only be exposed as biased but be changed to reflect reality? When the protagonist's journey of disillusionment reaches its climax, he can only formulate a bitter answer to this question. In the face of Clifton's death, he admits his powerlessness over changing biased historiography: All things, it is said, are duly recorded […]. But not quite, for actually it is only the known, the seen, the heard and only those events that the recorder regards as important that are put down, those lies his keepers keep their power by. But the cop would be Clifton's historian, his judge, his witness, and his executioner […]. Where were the historians today? And how would they put it down? (IM 439) …show more content…
Most importantly, Ellison accomplishes a literary master stroke. Since Invisible Man is nearly entirely composed of the protagonist's novel, said novel as an object within the story is transported from its textual dimension into the hands of the reader. In this sense, Invisible Man is the protagonist's novel and becomes a tangible historical object from his world. The way in which it differs from the other objects analyzed in this paper is that it makes no pretense of being an objective historical representation. If anything, Ellison sees the novel as a historical interpretation. This is why the protagonist writes about “what [he feels] to be the truth” and makes no claim to some elusive objective truth (573; emphasis
After having shown that Ellison challenges dominant historiography by showcasing how the black individual's experience can contest it, one question remains: How can historiography not only be exposed as biased but be changed to reflect reality? When the protagonist's journey of disillusionment reaches its climax, he can only formulate a bitter answer to this question. In the face of Clifton's death, he admits his powerlessness over changing biased historiography: All things, it is said, are duly recorded […]. But not quite, for actually it is only the known, the seen, the heard and only those events that the recorder regards as important that are put down, those lies his keepers keep their power by. But the cop would be Clifton's historian, his judge, his witness, and his executioner […]. Where were the historians today? And how would they put it down? (IM 439) …show more content…
Most importantly, Ellison accomplishes a literary master stroke. Since Invisible Man is nearly entirely composed of the protagonist's novel, said novel as an object within the story is transported from its textual dimension into the hands of the reader. In this sense, Invisible Man is the protagonist's novel and becomes a tangible historical object from his world. The way in which it differs from the other objects analyzed in this paper is that it makes no pretense of being an objective historical representation. If anything, Ellison sees the novel as a historical interpretation. This is why the protagonist writes about “what [he feels] to be the truth” and makes no claim to some elusive objective truth (573; emphasis