Invisible Man - Ralph Ellison
What's up with that title? The main man is not
invisible, even metaphorically, unless we consider that the true entity is
invisible, even to himself. He is not visible in any of relationships - not
deemed real or worthy of notice. He is not a man of consequence.
The first third of this book was fantastic - and
unlike anything I'd read. The middle third, with I. (yes, it's told in the
first person and we never learn the name of "Invisible Man") acting as a
Stalinist in harlem. I found this completely unbelievable and of base - the
puppet masters were too stupid to have actually had the kind of influence over
I. that the novel claims. Some parts of this third were memorable - namely the
the "zoot suiters" - I. is taken to be one of these criminals and this is the
start of his transformation and maturation into someone finally acting of his
own accord... perhaps. I never felt like I really got to know I. so I was never
convinced that he new himself at any point. This left me unsatisfied - like the
book failed to make it's point. What exactly did I. (or I, for that matter)
learn?
Posted: Fri - May 14, 2004 at 05:45 AM