After reading both
Ragtime and Mumbo Jumbo, I feel like I have been introduced to a good idea of
what a postmodernist historical fiction book looks like. However, as we wrap up
with our reading of Mumbo Jumbo, I feel a sense of relief, as I personally didn’t
enjoy the writing style of Ishmael Reed, and his love for confusion. I think
that the content of the book is extremely good, and that the social critique on
white appropriation of black culture in contrast with atonism and an
unwillingness to accept black culture was interesting. I felt like I was able
to gain a decent understanding of the authors opinions on racial relations and
interactions at the time, and I was also able to learn some about the history
of religions and beliefs within Haitian, African American, and Egyption
cultures.
However, I am entirely
not in favor of how the book was written. I enjoyed Ragtime – the book started
confusing, and each chapter would leave you scratching your head, wondering
what was going on. However, as we reached the end of the book, all of the
pieces fell into place, and as the reader, I was left with an “aha!” moment, in
which I felt like I understood everything, and I felt like I could really fashion
a critique and an opinion on the book and the message it was trying to convey. On
the opposite side of the spectrum, I was not pleased with the way that Mumbo
Jumbo ended, with a sudden fizzling out of the story, leaving you with as many
questions about Jew Grew as you had when it started. I felt like although there
was good intent in the novel, and while I still learned a great deal from it,
the execution was so postmodernist and experimental that it was hard to process
and take seriously.
I know there may be many
that disagree with me, but personally, postmodernism just isn’t sitting well
with me. I find the readings to sometimes be painful to try to process and work
through, and I feel like at some point, the author “toying” with the reader
becomes painfully annoying as opposed to interesting and new. I’d like to know your thoughts as my classmates on
postmodernism – do you disagree with me? Is there a new approach that I should
take towards reading these novels which will help me grasp them to a better
degree?
I definitely agree with your critique of Reed's writing style. In a sense, I would argue that his convoluted and dense prose counteracts the purpose of the novel -- which is to explain that what white society deems "Mumbo Jumbo" isn't in fact that at all -- because it scares away the average reader who would pick up the book off of the shelf. Ironically, I myself wouldn't have felt compelled to put in all the effort to understand the meaning of the novel if I weren't reading it in an academic setting, with constant explication in class. If Reed had taken an approach similar to Ragtime I think it would've made his novel even more influential.
ReplyDeleteI feel like Mumbo Jumbo being confusing and not having a satisfying ending isn't only a manifestation of postmodernism but also a commentary (critique?) of Atonism. Atonists generally want everything to be straightforward and follow the rules, while Jes Grew is more freeform (which could be why Mumbo Jumbo as a book is more freeform aka confusing).
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the book, and even as we neared the end of Mumbo Jumbo, I would have agreed with you completely. However, having finished the book an had time to process and think more in depth about the novel as a whole, I think that it was very important for Reed to structure it as he did. Part of the reason that it was so confusing to read was that Reed was setting it up as a detective story, but changing some of the traditional conventions to make it more postmodern in form. I think that appropriation of a literary form and a transformation of it is an good example of Jes Grew at work and embodies the very ideals that Reed is promoting. While I think Reed could have given us the same ideas in a form that was much easier to read, I also think the way he structured the novel gave us a deeper understanding of the meaning of Jes Grew and the conflicts that are prevalent throughout the novel.
ReplyDeleteI see where you're coming from with the critique of Reed's writing, especially since we were forewarned that it's a bit of wild ride. Reading it, I was often frustrated as I didn't understand what I had just read for the last 30 pages. However, with class discussions, I felt like we began to unfold what was written within the text. The details and grammatical errors (whether they were intentional or not) were a lot like jazz in its improvisational/unstructured form. We can see that the text itself is a manifestation of not only postmodernism, but Jes Grew in not only the 1920s and the 1960s when it was written, but even in our palms as we read in the present day.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI see what you're saying, and I definitely agree that Mumbo Jumbo left me with more unanswered than answered questions which was kind o ffrustrating. On the other hand, I also agree with Kat that the confusigness of it was a commentary on atonism. It was like REed saying - the atonists will think this is just mumbo jumbo but it's because they just don't understand it. So in many ways I think the fact that it was confusing was kind of the point -it forced us to be better than the atonists and to make an effort to understand the message that it was sending even if it seemed like mumbo jumbo on the surface. I guess I'm saying that event though it was confusing (and it definitely was) I really appreciated it because it made me think.
ReplyDelete