Veramendi 1
Blind Justice? Alienation within the Law in Richard Wright’s Native Son and Susan Glaspell’s
‘A Jury of Her Peers’”
An Honors Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of the Department of English
University of Florida
By
Melanie Veramendi
April 15, 2019 Veramendi 2
I. Introduction
Richard Wright’s Native Son (1940) is designed around the color line, molded and warped around it through its characters and racially driven situations. The novel centers on
Bigger Thomas, an African American man living in Chicago’s Southside in the 1930s and the almost inescapable presence of crime on his life. Susan Glaspell’s short story, “A Jury of Her
Peers” (1917), features a crime of passion that illustrates the separation between men and women when investigating a murder, revealing the distinct disparities in their understanding of the crime, and how perceptions of justice can vary between groups. At first glance, “A Jury of her
Peers” and Native Son seem to have little in common in terms of subject matter or content.
Nevertheless, both deal with the ramifications of societal persecution in our legal system and how individuals can suffer from institutions that do not recognize the challenges of underrepresented communities. There is a type of focused intensity that accompanies trials and investigations that attempts to uncover the motives and intentions of one sole individual. It is an extremely alienating and discomforting process, and this is only exacerbated when intersected with prejudice and discrimination. Thus, in this essay I want to highlight the deterioration of self and the dissociation that arises in works of fiction when characters are put in legal scenarios that decide their fates without considering who they are, only what they represent.
II. Deconstructing Marginalization in the Modern Day
It is crucial to understand and delineate the idea of a trial before taking a deeper examination of both texts. The literal trial scenes in Native Son are no doubt important to the overall meaning of the novel and deserves to be highlighted and dissected in any discussion of the novel’s representation of the legal system. However, I would argue that the physical trial in
Native Son is not the only kind of “trial” present in the novel, and that Bigger has metaphorically Veramendi 3
been on trial since he was born. Instead, the narrative also consists of informal trials. This is similar to Glaspell’s story, which does not portray an actual trial, but presents an informal case to a metaphorical “jury of her peers.” This point is especially significant because informal trials often bleed into real ones with sometimes frightening results. The media and society at large can play a huge role in what happens in a courtroom and both Wright and Glaspell are questioning the impartiality of the justice system in the face of these common and unofficial trials: trials that often center around historical forms of marginalization like racism, sexism and classism. In fact, their joint commentary on these phenomena of marginalization as issues that have remained ever present in our society since its founding is especially interesting as these are issues that are resurfacing in our own world.
Arguably the most significant movements of this generation have been the Black Lives
Matter and #MeToo campaigns, which have respectively targeted the systemic existence of racism and sexism in our society. The Black Lives Matter movement began after the acquittal of
George Zimmerman who shot and killed Trayvon Martin, a young black teenager (Bates).
Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch patrolman, killed Martin during an altercation in, which he mistook Martin for an older and more suspicious individual (Bates). Public outrage began quickly from the moment of his arrest as many advocates pointed out that Martin was a victim of racial profiling and was murdered for it (Bates). The Black Lives Matter movement took inspiration and direction from past actions like the Black Power Movement,1 also attempting to move away from traditional ideas of activism and usher in a new civil rights era. One of the most
1 The Black Power Movement began during the civil rights era of the 1960s to promote autonomy, racial equality and disrupting systematic institutions of oppression. The movement inspired other actions and groups like the Black Panther Party, which directly addressed issues like police violence and institutionalized racism that the Black Lives Matter movement is now confronting (Burnett). Veramendi 4
central aspects of this change is through the use of social media in the #BlackLivesMatter and
#MeToo campaigns. The importance of social media in these movements cannot be understated as it is used as both a tool to mass distribute information and as a way to make the movement interactive and personal. Video recording and live streaming have become extremely powerful tools for the campaign as individuals now have the power to connect with others in the movement in real time to broadcast the injustices they are facing in their lives.
What is especially compelling about both movements is how focused on story telling they are as they draw power in bringing individual stories out and highlighting them as representative of large-scale issues. Both movements allow people from all kinds of different backgrounds to share their stories regardless of fame or social status. The #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo movements allow for anyone with access to the internet the opportunity to use social media and talk about their history with sexual harassment, sexism, discrimination, and so forth. Owing to the use of social media each campaign has had rare successes that set them apart from previous movements that did not have access to it. The #MeToo movement in particular has been able to locate and denounce several individuals in high ranking positions in order to target institutional forces that uphold discrimination and prejudice. Furthermore, one notable example of the
#MeToo movement’s influence on institutional forces is how it has exposed several different kinds of powerful individuals in the media industry like Harvey Weinstein.2 Perhaps what is so fascinating about this movement is how it demonstrated how incredibly common sexual
2 Harvey Weinstein is arguably the most infamous of those implicated as a sexual harasser by the #MeToo movement. He was the co-founder of Miramax and The Weinstein Company, both successful movie studios, and was an influential person in the film industry. In 2017, a significant number of women, including several famous actresses, made sexual harassment and assault allegations against him. There were many people in Hollywood who were aware of Weinstein’s, and others’, behavior against women, but who felt completely powerless to stop it: “silent co-conspirators: dozens of people, over dozens of years, who knew what was going on but did nothing” (Bennett). Following his naming several others in Hollywood, like comedians Bill Cosby and Louis C.K, came under scrutiny for their own sexual harassment claims (Bennett). Veramendi 5
harassment and sexism is in the world. There were so many people who had stayed silent on their experiences for so long because they thought that they were the only ones who had been affected by sexual harassment. This movement, which focuses on solidarity allows people with similar experiences to break through the silence and take action in their lives and reach out to those they know and to create an actual impact in the world.
Perhaps the most visible impact of both the #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo campaigns are these movements’ ability to at times circumvent the legal system in order to enact concrete change. There are difficulties associated with the prosecution of nearly every type of legal case, but sexual assault and harassment are very difficult, because it often becomes a battle of different stories and allegations. If there is a lack of physical evidence, which there often is it can be challenging to actually prove that any misconduct did occur. These cases are also, historically very hard for victims to have to undergo especially if they must testify. The experience itself is traumatic, but reliving it in front of a jury can sometimes amplify the trauma for the victim. The movement itself is not able to pass legal convictions or penalize the transferors in a court of law, but as seen with cases like Harvey Weinstein’s they are able to pass judgement in court of public opinion and enact a tangible difference. What is fascinating is how similar these movements goals and tactics are to Glaspell and Wright’s works which use their storytelling to uncover systematic injustices in society and in legal institutions.
III. Uncovering Sexism in “A Jury of Her Peers”
Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers” delineates a clear gender hierarchy of early 20th century
American society, which has a significant impact on the characters in their intentions, motivations, and perception of crime. The death of Minnie Foster’s husband John Wright under suspicious circumstances is the starting point of the short story. Yet it is what happens after the Veramendi 6
death that is the true concern of Glaspell’s story. The investigation is crucial in understanding the text, and before it even begins established gender dichotomies are readily apparent to the reader.
The beginning lines bear no mention of any crime or misdeed. Glaspell instead writes, “Martha
Hale opened the storm-door and got a cut of the north wind…As she hurriedly wound [a scarf] round her head her eye made a scandalized sweep of her kitchen.” (Glaspell 1). The first woman that exists within this short story, her first interest is given to the kitchen, the heart of the home and the central space of the domestic paradigm. Mrs. Hale is being hurried to the door by her husband who is impatient to leave their home and reach the crime scene at Minnie’s house. It is clear by Mr. Hale’s manner that he brings Mrs. Hale along as an accessory, to entertain the wife of the sheriff Mrs. Peters who is already there (Glaspell 2). Within this short sequence so much of the characters’ roles and the expectations assigned to them by others are revealed. The men of the story have careers and professions, things that set them apart and make them needed. The women are housewives and mothers, accessories to the roles of their husbands. There is the sheriff and there is the sheriff’s wife. Granted, the men are husbands as well, but it is important to note that they can be more than simply husbands. The men of this story can reach beyond their marital status while women are kept firmly within the constraints of motherhood and marriage.
Gender clearly dictates your role and power within this society, and power is a very important element in this story.
This unbalanced power dynamic within this gendered hierarchy is carried into the actual murder investigation of Minnie Foster. Once they arrive at the crime scene, the house of Minnie
Foster and her late husband, everyone is immediately assigned tasks. The men begin the process of gathering clues and information, performing their jobs and acting in the capacity of their respective positions. The women are left to pass time waiting for the men and inadvertently Veramendi 7
attempting to understand Minnie Foster. The men even joke about them figuring out the motivation of the murder before conducting their official investigation separately. The men tell their wives, “and keep your eye out…no telling; you women might come upon a clue to the motive--and that's the thing we need” (Glaspell 7). Mr. Hale quickly questions if the women would even be able to identify a clue, clearly indicating his low expectations of the women’s investigative skills. What is interesting, though, is not only that the women conduct separate investigations, but the way in which they investigate. The men apply their own perspectives on the crime, in their attempt to solve the mystery behind it. It is why they question the murderer’s choice of weapon, because they cannot fathom using a rope when there is a gun available. This is in contrast to the women, who use their own experiences to attempt to understand the situation, using empathy to engage with Minnie’s possible state of mind. For example, they look at the objects that they are the most familiar with, like kitchen items and Minnie’s knitting, objects that pertain to this domesticity. More importantly however, they are objects that pertain to Minnie and would most closely reveal her state of mind and motives before the death of her husband.
The men are completely ignorant of this fact and when the sheriff says, “‘nothing here but kitchen things …with a little laugh for the insignificance of kitchen things,’” it highlights that crippling lack of awareness (Glaspell 4).
This gender disparity culminates into a physical separation that can be seen through the setting, which places men at the top and women at the bottom. The women are isolated on the bottom floor of the house and are left to the hearth of the home like the kitchen and sitting room.
What is more, they are unable to explore the home in the way that the men are able to travel. The men can move throughout the house, thanks to their position and status, unbothered. Yet, they choose to stay away from the kitchen and more “womanly” areas because they dismiss them as Veramendi 8
insignificant areas of the house. They are exclusively interested in the scene of the crime, a place where the women are not allowed, though they are investigating the murder as well. In fact, it is in that limited space that the women find Minnie’s empty bird cage. They eventually piece together that someone killed the bird inside the cage, by breaking its neck, and they strongly suspect Minnie’s husband. It is curious how they handle the bird, and how much it reminds them of Minnie herself. One of the women even says, “‘[Minnie]--come to think of it, she was kind of like a bird herself. Real sweet and pretty, but kind of timid’” (Glaspell 15). Thus, the limitations of space ultimately signify the limitations of freedom that women face, the limitations that
Minnie faced. Her home is a literal manifestation of a cage, like the one that kept her beloved canary, from which Minnie’s desperation was born.
Glaspell furthers this idea of total isolation by having Minnie Foster act as an unseen protagonist whose actions and motives are veiled behind mystery and misconception. The story is all about Minnie Foster and the question of her guilt or innocence. Yet, she is never given a speaking role in the story nor is she ever seen or given direct credit. She appears in the story through recollections, accusations, and assumptions by other characters. Both Mrs. Hale and
Mrs. Peters attest to the fact that no one really interacted with Minnie and being a farmwife, she was often secluded from the general population, comparing it to a kind of horrible “stillness”
(Glaspell 23). Minnie is very similar to her bird with the broken neck, as her voice is taken away, and the only time she receives agency and consideration is through the investigation conducted by the women of the story. It is difficult to understand though the motivations that propel these women to feel empathy for Minnie’s plight. Both women, though understanding and compassionate characters, are not close to Minnie on a personal level. Their devotion to Minnie goes beyond any notions of sympathy, and perhaps may be credited to a type of solidarity that Veramendi 9
their investigation invoked in the women. As the women go through her things and consider her situation, Minnie stops being an abstract concept to the women and instead becomes a person whose experiences and difficulties should be valued. This is in direct contrast to the men in the story who act as a parallel to a realistic jury, (which would have at the time been composed of all men), as they completely ignore Minnie’s agency and refuse to understand her motives and the deeper implications of the murder.
Consequently, the women of Glaspell’s short story are in many ways the jury for Minnie’s case, having been presented all the facts and a silent testimony, and provide her with their own sentence. It is difficult to pinpoint when exactly their investigation of Minnie’s house transforms into their own informal trial. Perhaps, this is because the women of the story seem to operate on a fine line between incidental observation and purposeful reasoning. Nevertheless, the story quickly morphs into a trial with Mrs. Hale acting as a pseudo prosecutor and Mrs. Peters assuming the role of the defense. Mrs. Peters as the sheriff’s wife is in an unusual position especially, because according to the men “a sheriff's wife is married to the law” (Glaspell 25).
Mrs. Hale is conversely free from that kind of bias much like her husband who is a witness to the investigation, she is a witness to Minnie’s dramatic change and the suffering she underwent at the hands of her husband. Consequently, the women are at times at odds with each other as they uncover more evidence concerning Minnie’s role in her husband’s death. Glaspell attests, “‘But,
Mrs. Hale’ said the sheriff's wife, ‘the law is the law.’ ‘I s'pose 'tis,’ answered Mrs. Hale shortly.
She turned to the stove… when she straightened up she said aggressively: ‘The law is the law-- and a bad stove is a bad stove. How'd you like to cook on this?’” (Glaspell 15). They are very similar to an actual jury in that they deliberate Mary’s role in this murder as well as the applications of the law. Mrs. Peters stays firm in her convictions that “the law is the law,” while Veramendi 10
Mrs. Hale wants to go beyond the law to understand what had been done to Minnie. For instance, the text alludes to the fact that Minnie was abused by her husband, both mentally and physically, several times by many of the women. Mrs. Hale, though, also presents an interesting argument that what Minnie’s husband did to her was nothing less than spiritual murder. She reasons that being in the restrictive and abusive relationship was suffocating Minnie to the point that the murder was done in pure desperation and that this desperation should be accounted in the judgement of the crime.
As a result, their final judgment seems to imply a collective identity, as rural farmwomen, that seems to rest very heavily on the consciousness of the women in the story. All the female characters at one point consider Minnie’s situation and question why they did not intervene.
Despite their utter lack of responsibility towards the crime, they feel almost complicit in it. Mrs.
Hale is incredibly bothered by her own inaction stating, “‘I could've come,’ retorted Mrs. Hale shortly. ‘I stayed away because …I don't know what it is, but it's a lonesome place…I wish I had come over to see Minnie Foster sometimes’” (Glaspell 18). In the end, they do decide to hide the evidence of Minnie’s bird box and conceal her motive at the risk of becoming accessories of the crime. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale know the psychological effects of being alienated and the lack of advocacy that women have in society. Mrs. Peters herself says, “the law has got to punish crime,” but when the law is not equipped to render justice to the systematic inequalities that persecute women, then there is no legal framework to abide by (Glaspell 25). Thus, both women choose to operate within their own parameters of informal justice rooted within this collective solidarity in clear recognition of the limitations of law, which does not recognize the consequences of sexism in society.
IV. Naturalism in Native Son Veramendi 11
Ideas of justice and collective consciousness play heavily within Wright’s Native Son, which centers around the ramifications of racial prejudice within U.S society. The novel, written in the style of naturalism, rests deeply on a focus on the environment and its effects on an individual’s psyche. Consequently, the setting plays an important role in delineating many of the themes and concepts of the novel. This is especially true in Native Son as the world of Bigger Thomas is defined by separation. The novel features such a clear division of different racial worlds that there is a black world and a white world. There is a North Side of Chicago and there is South
Side, there are rich areas and there are poor ones. Accordingly, there is a strong connection between economics and housing that defines Bigger Thomas’s Chicago and that occupy a majority of his overall worries and struggles. Bigger is physically constrained by his environment, with the novel opening with his family of four sharing a one-bedroom, rat-infested, apartment. Wright includes entire passages dedicated to illustrating the limited housing options for African Americans in Chicago, and the segregation in the city could not be clearer, as black tenants are forced into small unsafe apartments by white landlords. It harkens back to the physical separation between men and women seen in Glaspell’s story. Thus, the setting of Native
Son plays a large role in setting up the alienation of Bigger within his society that is brought upon by racially driven discrimination in economics and housing.
In fact, the mental torment brought upon Bigger by racial segregation factors heavily in the murder of Mary Dalton. The emotions most prevalent in Bigger in the first section of the novel, aptly titled “Fear,” are panic, shame, and anger. These are profoundly negative emotions that are present within Bigger from the first page of the novel. His economic and racial class put him in a severe disadvantage in the world and in the past, he has had to address that handicap through a life of crime and stealing (Wright 17). His change in fortune with his new position as a driver for Veramendi 12
the Daltons does not reduce these destructive feelings within him. Truthfully, Bigger being a chauffeur only seems to amplify his own feelings of insecurity and fear. During the interview, in fact, we learn that Bigger “felt guilty and condemned [and believed he] should not have come here” (Wright 62). Yet he does view the position as offering the potential of a better life, a life he covets and likes to fantasize about frequently. After Bigger is hired and settled he actually thinks that “this was not going to be bad at all…and he would buy himself another watch too…this would be an easy life” (Wright 74). The ability to fantasize is very important for
Bigger as it allows him some theoretical outlet for his desires and wants. Minnie had her beautiful hopeful looking canary as an outlet, and Bigger has the illusions of a better life awaiting him.
However, his interactions with Mary Dalton and Mary’s communist boyfriend Jan visibly upset him and cause him profound mental anguish. Their attempt at benevolence is a clear change in the power dynamic that Bigger has been raised around, which he has grown so accustomed to that he knows no other way of life. In Glaspell’s story, the oppressive power dynamics lead to Minnie’s extreme breakdown, with her husband’s act of cruelty towards her bird, acting as the tipping point. Mary Dalton and Jan, though, upset the power dynamics in a different way by trying to treat Bigger “equally.” They are classic examples of white saviors, a term used to denote white individuals who appear to help people of color often to serve their own needs or desires (Guarino). Mary, like her parents, engages in the white savior complex in her constant ill-executed attempts to attempt to relate to and engage with Bigger. Jan, though not as objectively clueless as Mary, also engages in the same process, but in the hopes of recruiting
Bigger to become a communist. Moreover, Bigger does not respond well to their ill-executed attempts. Wright declares, “[Bigger] felt foolish… letting a white man hold his hand. What Veramendi 13
would people passing along the street think? He was very conscious of his black skin… Did not white people despise a black skin?” (Wright 67). In fact, as their interactions progress in the novel so does his confusion and disturbance by their actions and thoughts. He desperately tries to put the power dynamic back in order, but they resist him at each turn. They are blind to how uncomfortable Bigger grows at each friendly gesture and word. Jan’s words and ideas on social equality frighten him, as does his status as a communist.
He is also greatly distressed by Mary Dalton in particular, and though he has fantasized about her, he is not able to comprehend her flirtatious and friendly manner. It seems impossible to him that she should be interested in pursuing Bigger in any way him because of his race.
Wright is very specific with his diction in order to convey the twisted state of Bigger’s mind. He writes of Bigger’s thoughts, “goddamn her soul to hell! Was she laughing at him? Were they making fun of him? What was it they wanted? Why didn’t they leave him alone…He was trying desperately to understand” (Wright 84). It illustrates how deeply his environment and his society have affected him and how it causes him to heavily distrust any attempts at crossing the racial divide. Here again, he is reminiscent of the women of Glaspell’s “Jury of Her Own Peers,” who distrust their husbands with the information of Minnie Foster’s true intentions and state of mind.
Bigger is not only physically isolated, but mentally as well, and so when encountering ideas of equality and social justice he is upset by them.
This theme of mental compartmentalization and isolation can be seen in the actual crime itself, and Bigger’s perception of Mary as more of a representation than a human being. Bigger is completely bewildered by Mary and how she acts the night of her death because his expectations of white women have always been in reflection of his racial status. He first sees an image of Mary Dalton in a movie theatre when he is with his friends (Wright 33). Bigger is able Veramendi 14
to covet Mary’s image and desire her, but it is in a very abstract way. When he finally meets her in real life her overtly friendly and enthusiastic manner clashes severely with the image he had in his head. He saw Mary as a hypersexual, but unattainable white woman that he could desire from afar. Bigger even weighs in on this issue when he ponders that Mary “on the screen was not dangerous and he could do with her what he liked” (Wright 69). It is notable that Wright uses the word dangerous to describe Bigger’s thoughts on Mary in this section, that she is a threat to
Bigger. It is clear that Bigger wants her to remain a silent symbol of unachievable possibility, who resides only in fantasy because in reality he knows that such a relationship would be deadly for him.
Hence, when Mary pushes Bigger to bring her and Jan to an “authentically black” diner in his part of town, he is troubled by the merging of two very distinct worlds. Throughout, the night
Mary had been drinking heavily enough that she passes out after Jan leaves, which frazzles
Bigger in a different way. On the hand, she is finally rendered voiceless, but on the other he is forced to carry her up to her room (Wright 103). It is then that he ultimately looks at her and begins taking note of her features. Wright describes, “her lips faintly moist in the hazy blue light were parted and he saw the furtive glints of her white teeth…her lips touched his like something he imagined” (Wright 106). His attempt to kiss her and his sexual assault on her person revert their power dynamic back to something he is more comfortable with dealing with: sex. In terms of social and monetary power, as a white wealthy female Mary surpasses Bigger, but physically he is untouchable. He is finally in control. Wright asserts, “he lifted her and laid her on the bed something urged him to leave at once, but he leaned over her, excited, looking at her face in the dim light” (Wright 84). That is, until Mary’s mother interrupts them and he is quickly put back into a position of fear. It is in this fear that he kills Mary, almost unconsciously. The entrance of Veramendi 15
Mary’s mother would bode catastrophic for Bigger, as he would quickly be accused of rape and suffer the severe consequences from the assumption. Thus, his killing of Mary is an act made in desperation, an equalizing action, that he does in order to protect himself from the societal consequences of being labeled a rapist.
V. Historical Stereotypes and the Degradation of the Black Female Body in Native Son
Ida B. Wells-Barnett’s The Red Record (1895) addresses the adverse perception of African
American men by the white majority during the Reconstruction era. Wells-Barnett’s pamphlet looks at the “southern horrors” and the myths that were being perpetuated about African
American men especially in the South. These myths attempted to denigrate black men by creating racially prejudiced stereotypes that had no societal or historical backing. They propagated the idea of African American men as rioters, rapists and political anarchists. Wells-
Barnett declares that “while the Negro suffers the soul deformity resultant from two and a half centuries of slavery, he is no more guilty of [these]…vile charges than the white man who would blacken his name” (Wells-Barnett 4). The charges that Wells-Barnett focuses on are all things that Bigger is accused of in mid-20th century Chicago, many years after the time period of
Reconstruction. Bigger correctly assumes that he will be implicated in Mary’s death and that he will be vilified as her rapist. He is constantly put in a position that labels him as an alien threat to everyone else, like the police, who are quick to believe that he is a communist traitor (Wright
153). Bigger is very cognizant of these realities just as Wells-Barnett was, because their history is such a repetitive one. It stands to reason that these are the stereotypes that Wright is directly addressing through the plight of Bigger, and that he is particularly concerned to show how damaging this perception is to African American men, who must live in a world where they are thought of as monsters and are designated as the scapegoats of society by a controlling and Veramendi 16
prejudiced majority. Wells-Barnett ends her work with a chapter called “The Remedy,” where she prescribes that to amend the heinous crimes of lynching perpetrated against black men, we need “a fair trial by law for those accused of crime, and punishment by law after honest conviction” (Wells-Barnett 18). She wrote that in 1895, and as Wright demonstrates in Native
Son, this plea is not answered by the time that Bigger Thomas enters a courtroom.
It is also crucial to highlight that this stereotypically-driven narrative that punishes black men leaves no room to discuss those that are even more victimized by the designed system, namely black women. Bessie is introduced in Native Son as Bigger’s “girl,” a typical young black woman living in Southside. Beyond that description, though, very little is devoted to fleshing out her character as anything more than his woman. Furthermore, as the novel is written from
Bigger’s perspective, her sexual appeal and physicality is much more emphasized and noticed than any other aspect of her being. There is something very generic about Bessie as a character that makes her seem almost replaceable or insignificant in the beginning of the novel. Certainly,
Bigger believes this, because when his brother suggests that “you got a good job now you can get a better gal than Bessie,” he privately agrees (Wright 101). He even does a literal comparison between Bessie and Mary when he takes Mary to her bedroom before he accidentally suffocates her (Wright 104). This is not to say that Bessie is entirely without nuance and depth, as Wright does indicate that Bessie is an alcoholic, and that she drinks to try and forget her despair over her work. Bigger even tries to encourage this behavior by buying her whiskey and other drinks to intoxicate her and make her more liable to have sex with him. He sees their relationship as one of giving and taking and that they are mutually using the other:
He felt the narrow orbit of her life…she worked long hours, hard and hot hours seven days a
week, with only Sunday afternoons off; and when she did get off…most nights she was too Veramendi 17
tired to go out; she only wanted to get drunk… so he would give her the liquor and she would
give him herself. He had heard her complain about how hard the white folks worked her…He
knew why she liked him; he gave her money for drinks. He knew that if he did not give it to
her someone else would; she would see to that. Bessie, too, was very blind. (Wright 133)
This passage is perhaps the most revealing in regard to Bessie, as it is one of the rare moments in the novel where Bigger actually considers her motivations and desires. He recognizes the misery and depression that she and other African Americans living in Southside feel because of their economic status. He relates to these oppressive ideas multiple times throughout the novel. Yet I would argue that Bigger is much more critical of Bessie than he is of himself. He even goes so far as to call her “blind,” and to judge her for what he sees as ignorance, while not attempting to find empathy or sympathy for her situation (Wright 133). This is problematic, of course, because
Bigger as the protagonist and sole focus of the novel is the only way in which we can see Bessie in any light. Thus, she is throughout the novel pushed back into the darkness, in the background of Bigger’s narrative, until she is thrust out again at center stage by her death.
The use of Bessie’s body in the novel as a piece of evidence for Bigger’s trial illustrates the way in which black women are often used in service of narratives that do not provide any inclusion or considerations for the experience of black women. Bessie is an extremely important plot device in Native Son in many ways. For example, she provides Bigger with the inspiration to attempt a ransom scheme against the Dalton’s. When this fails, they go on the run together, though Bessie is unaware of the extent of Bigger’s crime. They make it to an abandoned building to stay the night when Bigger concludes that he cannot keep Bessie with him. He believes that “a woman was a dangerous burden when a man was running away,” and so he decides to abandon her (Wright 135). However, he also recognizes that Bessie would be a liability if she was out Veramendi 18
alone in the world and could lead to his capture. Bigger, in his mind, is left with no other choice than to kill Bessie so that she cannot incriminate him in any way. Before he kills her, though, he does rape her in a very graphic manner. Wright narrates, “[Bigger] was conscious of nothing now but her and what he wanted... Bessie’s hands were on his chest, her fingers spreading protestingly [Sic] open, pushing him away” (Wright 209). After he is done sexually assaulting her, Bigger takes a brick and hits her multiple times before throwing her body out of the window and into the alley.
This entire action is significant in many ways, but the one that is the most striking in a literary sense is that it serves as a comparison to Mary’s assault and murder. It is important that
Bigger never physically penetrates Mary, even though he does force himself on her. This distinction is key to the text especially as his later trial will focus quite heavily on the charge of rape. Wright is clear to show that, according to a mid-20th century legal definition of rape as penetration, Bigger did not rape Mary. Even his killing of Mary is more accidental than it is purposeful, as he mistakenly suffocates her in an attempt to quiet her (Wright 87). However, there is nothing unconscious or accidental about how Bessie is murdered, as Bigger not only plans out his actions against her, but also takes time to reassure himself that what he is doing is right (Wright 222). In Bigger’s mind there is no other option than to murder her, and his treatment of Bessie physically seems very deliberate in this passage. He beats her to death before throwing her body out the window like garbage into the cold night. We as readers later find out during Bigger’s trial that Bessie survived both the beating and the fall from the window and actually dies from the freezing cold (Wright 343).
The intense imagery of a lone broken black female body cast out into an alley to die is arresting and tragic. Justice, though, will never be given to Bessie. Instead, her body is used as Veramendi 19
literal evidence of Bigger’s intent and ability to murder when he is on trial for Mary Dalton’s murder. Bigger even notes that, “he knew that it would be for the death of the white girl that he would be punished. The black girl was merely “‘evidence’” (Wright 342). It is clear that the deceased are unable to speak for themselves. They are unable to go to courtrooms and testify on their behalf. They cannot seek justice themselves, and so they rely on the legal system to seek justice on their behalf. Mary is afforded that right and that justice with Bigger’s trial, but Bessie is never given that opportunity. Bessie is used and discarded even in her death, which only serves to reinforce the belief that black women simply exist as bodies for consumption whether they be consumed by a man, the courts, or society at large.
VI. The Intersection of Racism and Sexism
The fault of this gross exploitation of black women, I believe, in part rests on the problems that arise from using an extremely individual story to talk about a larger experience that do not give equal space to the plights of others. Wright uses Bigger to target injustices present in the black male experience and highlights traditions of those injustices, in a manner similar to Wells-Barnett. Yet the novel, because of its close focus on black men loses the important distinctions and differences that make up the African American experience. Black women are part of that culture, but not being better represented in works like Native Son that are writing about that experience, feels lacking and exploitative. Bessie is a product of this issue.
Bigger’s situation is understood through texts like The Red Record, but Bessie has no such text.
Black women in Native Son are left in this liminal space that offers no agency or power. Bigger is a character, but he also is a symbol a symbol of the rage, misery and hopelessness that exemplifies the experience of black men in the United States. Yet, there are no such symbols like Veramendi 20
Bigger that exists in Native Son that speaks to black women and provides them any meaningful voice in the novel.
Scholar and writer Danielle McGuire examines this concept in her work “‘Power to the
Ice Pick!’” (2010) which considers how black women are treated in a society that actively limits, neglects and abuses them. Specifically, she looks at the case of Joan Little, a black woman in
North Carolina who was serving time in the local jail for breaking, entering and larceny. It was during her time in county jail that a white male jailer came into her cell and sexually assaulted her, and so Little killed him with an icepick. Her trial seemed very straightforward as there was an abundance of physical evidence that indicated that a sexual assault had taken place and that she was acting in self-defense. Nonetheless, Little found herself at the center of a broad debate over the defense of black womanhood. Multiple stereotypes were used to undermine Little’s story and argue that black women cannot be raped. McGuire maintains, they “pegged Little as a stereotypical jezebel and rumors about her respectability or lack thereof spread throughout town”
(McGuire 208). Her trial also, had several obstacles that she needed to overcome to prove her innocence like the jury. McGuire finds, “Joan Little would receive...not a jury of her peers...but rather the justice of a middle class middle aged white male segment only" (McGuire 219). Her case was difficult because as a poor black woman, she was in the unique position of having to defend herself against the combined prejudices based on race, sex, and class. And this is especially relevant to Native Son, because Bessie is a poor black woman who was raped, and who did not receive any justice or consideration, because of that status. The stereotypes surrounding her identity defined her and diminished her humanity.
VII. Collective Consciousness and Lack of Free Will in Native Son Veramendi 21
It is interesting to see how neatly Bigger molds himself into that twisted stereotype about black men in the U.S. This push towards the familiar is perhaps why Bigger immediately shifts back to crime after murdering Mary and burning her body. After strangling Mary, Bigger is extremely vulnerable to being captured and in order to elude the police, he rids himself of all the evidence that links him to the crime. He burns Mary’s body in the furnace, hides her suitcase, and creates an alibi that would credibly frame Jan for the murder. Yet he also makes very big mistakes during this process, almost to the point that it seems purposeful. For example, he begins meeting with Bessie soon after the murder, and they make a plan to try and extort the Dalton’s by pretending that Mary has been kidnapped by communists (Wright 176-177). He is trying to regress back to the status quo of criminality designated to him by racially driven prejudice in society. It is as if he is caught in a never-ending loop of crime and persecution that he cannot escape from, the murder only sealing his fate to it. Bigger at many points in the novel expresses a certain type of helplessness in his behavior or thoughts that indicate that his sense of self is fragmented. Bigger in the novel is pitted against himself so often that when he finally commits the act that will destroy him, he is unable to process it. Bigger is left reeling by his killing of
Mary and later Bessie, and how to perceive himself on an individual level, much less understand how his actions may be understood on a societal level in regard to his race and class.
Subsequently, Wright addresses the idea of racial consciousness, or a collective identity, directly in the novel through a conversation two black men have over Bigger’s crime. The conversation occurs while Bigger is on the run from everyone for the murders of Mary and
Bessie. Bigger is forced into hiding and so he breaks into an apartment building and overhears a dialogue between two black men, Jack and Jim, concerning his case. Jack feels that if he saw
Bigger, he would turn him in because he is responsible for his own actions and he has caused a Veramendi 22
great deal of trouble for the black community. Jim disagrees with this wholeheartedly, saying,
“but Jack ever’ nigger looks guilty t’ white folks when somebody’s done a crime” (Wright 317).
They both end up taking opposing stances on Bigger, and on whether he should be helped because of distinctly opposing perspectives. Jack finds him to be a harmful figure who has hurt all African Americans in the city, while Jim believes that Bigger is a scapegoat and just one of the many victims at the hands of their system. Nonetheless, their disagreement rests on something larger than Bigger and his crime and becomes more of an argument on collective versus individual identity. Jack believes in a “survival of the fittest” mentality that argues that every black man is on his own and must do what they need to in order to survive. Jim, though, pushes for a collective identity that finds solidarity with all African Americans because they are being persecuted together. Jim passionately says, “when folks hate me. Ah don’ wanna git erlong…ah don’ care whut yuh say. Ah’d die fo Ah’d let ‘em scare me inter tellin’ on tha’ man
[Sic]” (Wright 318). These men both verbalize so many of the feelings that Bigger has had for himself and for his community: feelings of anger, fear, acceptance, and indignation that rage within Bigger and make him feel so isolated and alone.
This is perhaps one of the biggest differences between Wright’s novel and Glaspell’s short story, which has such an emphasis on female solidarity. In Native Son there is so much more discord and confusion that there is no unambiguous communal consciousness, because often
African Americans are pitted against each other in order to survive. It is not just hatred from the white majority that black men suffer from in Wright’s novel, but a self-hatred that makes them isolated from their own communities. Furthermore, though the women in Glaspell’s work do possess that unity by the end of the story, it is important to remember that Minnie was isolated by these women before the murder. Mrs. Hale even said that she did not want to visit Minnie Veramendi 23
because the house and environment just seemed too sad and off-putting (Glaspell 3). Hence, both speak to this idea of victimization and separation. There are so many characters in this novel that place assumptions on who Bigger really is and try to assume his motivations. It comes from all sides in the novel: from the white mob, the Daltons, Jan, these men, and many others all with their own notions and prejudices about Bigger. It all culminates to Bigger being literally hunted down, to show how really alienated he is, and when he is finally caught Bigger has little to do, but await his predetermined fate. He has finally lost his freedom. However, despite the coming trial’s inevitable conclusion, Bigger is able to find solidarity in the last moments of the novel with his attorney, Max.
VIII. The Intricacies of Bigger’s Defense
Max is one of the only characters of the novel who both sympathizes and empathizes with
Bigger’s struggles and serves as an outlet for Bigger’s hidden thoughts and feelings. The final section of the novel, titled “Fate,” is arguably the most morose and speculative, owing in part to the reduction in pace as Bigger sits in jail, but also in part due to the nature of Bigger’s trial.
Bigger knows from the moment he is captured that he will have to die, and he falls into a deep depression because of this reality. In fact, Wright affirms that Bigger “went without resistance… he looked without hope or resentment” (Wright 346). The introduction of Bigger’s lawyer Max is crucial in this section and he is immediately different from the white men that Bigger has previously met. This is to some degree because Max is himself an outsider in the white community, as he is Jewish and a communist sympathizer. However, it is also because Max actually tries to engage with Bigger on a human level and consider his desires and perspective.
Max tells Bigger, “I know that almost every white face you’ve met in your life had it in for you even when that white face didn’t know it” (Wright 438). Max asks Bigger to trust him and to Veramendi 24
understand that they are on the same side in this legal battle. Bigger’s response to this becomes incredibly poignant and he points out that though he does trust Max, that “when a white man talked to him, he was caught out in no man’s land” (Wright 439). Bigger before Max has very little communication with white men and delivers most of his commentary internally and acts mainly as a silent protagonist, very much like Minnie. Max’s sincerity and assertions of understanding strike a chord within Bigger and allow him to share all the private and intimate feelings and thoughts he has been struggling to voice.
Consequently, at Max’s request for trust he begins an outspoken discussion on the reality of his mental state. Bigger asserts in Native Son that in the U.S black men are “whipped before you born” (Wright 440): that black men suffer every day of their lives and before their lives even begin because there is a history of suffering behind them. Bigger tells Max that “they kill you before you die” in order to convey the total lack of autonomy and free will that he possesses
(Wright 446). This small monologue that Bigger delivers to Max not only summarizes many of the themes and concepts that the novel centers around, but serves as a basis for Max’s defense of
Bigger. Bigger’s speech is one of the only vocal moments in the novel where Bigger finally releases many of the thoughts he has kept buried deep within himself. Bigger’s entire journey throughout Native Son has been about survival and about trying to live to the next day and get ahead in his world. He is a reflective character, but he is also filled with such an intense fear that he is constantly trying to avoid the state of his existence in this environment. Bigger would rather fight, run away, or commit murder than face these innate truths, and so this moment of confession is intensely vulnerable. However, in his admission to Max, Bigger is finally able to attain a kind of relief that “eased from his shoulders a heavy burden” and finally confront the mental anguish that he has carried for so long (Wright 334). Veramendi 25
His admission influences Max’s final summation at the trial, which in turn serves as the climax of the novel. There, Max presents an argument that reflects the conflicted mental state that Bigger has suffered at the hands of the system. The core of his speech looks at how Bigger has been the product of debilitating societal forces that have constrained him to the point of dehumanizing him. Max’s goal is not to argue Bigger’s innocence of the crime, as he several times in his statement to the court asserts that Bigger is guilty. His goal is to show that he is a product of something greater than himself, the result of an oppressive machine that targets
African Americans in the name of prejudice and power. This oppressive system has been with
Bigger from the beginning. It tells him where to live, who to love, how to feel, and how to value himself. It is a system without hope because it kills any chance for growth or change. Max compares African Americans to living corpses in society, forgotten and buried by the white majority that controls the world (Wright 497). It is only when something terrible happens, something that cannot be ignored, like the murder of a white woman, that the world remembers the corpses. In essence, he argues that it is impossible to convict Bigger without acknowledging the responsibility that society has had in this murder. His crime was an action predicated on thousands of previous decisions that left Bigger with no other recourse or escape. His life was built on illusions and false promises, and once again Bigger seems so similar to Minnie’s caged bird. Bigger has no political or judicial freedom because of that societal constriction, it is all linked together, and that linkage is crucial to understand.
Wright’s inclusion of a reference to Leopold and Loeb case illuminates the many racially driven prejudices that Bigger faced in his trial. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb became infamous for their joint involvement in the kidnapping and murder of young Bobby Franks in
May, 1924. The pair is referenced extensively in the novel and their crime is often compared to Veramendi 26
Bigger’s. Bigger recalls, that “Loeb and Leopold had planned to have the father of the murdered boy get on a train and throw the money out of the window while passing some spot” and this inspires him to try extortion (Wright 130). The pair is then mentioned again during Bigger’s trial by Max in order to remind the court that crimes of this magnitude have been committed before and were given regular procedure. Yet, Wright goes beyond simply using the Loeb and Leopold case as a common allusion or simple comparison to Bigger’s crime. Wright is also trying to reference the fact that even though Leopold and Loeb committed their infamous crime, their punishment was not nearly as severe as Bigger’s.3 Leopold and Loeb killed Bobby Franks undeniably, and he was killed not out of fear or in the heat of passion, but methodically and purposefully. Their crime of murdering a young teenage boy and then attempting to extort the child’s grieving parents is arguably equally as horrendous as Bigger’s murder of Mary.
Moreover, Loeb and Leopold committed clear premeditated murder, while Bigger’s was an act of passion, and that difference is extremely important when deciding the outcome of murder cases.
Nevertheless, a key difference between Bigger’s case and that of Loeb and Leopold is that
Bigger’s execution is seemingly inevitable. Bigger, and every other character in Native Son, knows that the minute that Bigger was caught that his fate was sealed. He even says this to Max:
“it seems sort of natural- like, me being here facing that death chair. Now I come to think of it, it seems like something like this just had to be” (Wright 333). The trial is little more than a thinly veiled pre-text before Bigger is pronounced guilty and is sentenced to die. Loeb and Leopold as
3 Loeb and Leopold were sentenced on September 10, 1924 by Judge John Caverly to “99 years for the kidnapping and life in prison for the murder” (Baatz). After their sentence they were both sent to different prisons with Loeb dying in prison at the age of 30 at the hands of another inmate (Baatz). Leopold, however, was granted parole in 1958 and served only 33 years of his sentence. He lived out the rest of his days in Puerto Rico under general anonymity (Baatz). Veramendi 27
white upper-class men, had an especially pronounced advantage to Bigger in the legal system.
Inherently they cast more sympathetic figures to the many eyes watching this case than Bigger, a black man, ever would. And this is because Bigger is not even considered a human being by most of the society in 1930’s Chicago. Wright even includes newspaper accounts of Bigger’s trial to demonstrate the realities of public opinion against Bigger. He asserts, “though the Negro killer’s body does not seem compactly built, he gives the impression of possessing abnormal physical strength… his skin is exceedingly black. His lower jaw protrudes obnoxiously, reminding one of a jungle beast” (Wright 324). It belies the absurd notion that Bigger could ever receive fair representation in a system that degrades him to the point of savagery, that strips him of his innate human rights to justice.
Max’s style of argument may even be a parallel to the argument used by real life lawyer
Clarence Darrow in his appeal for Leopold and Loeb. Though Leopold and Loeb were debatably more sympathetic to the jury than Bigger is in the novel, they were still abhorred for their crime and their trial quickly became an enormous spectacle (Baatz). Darrow, like Max, was intensely aware of the many eyes that were closely watching the case outside of the court as well as within and so took great measures to avoid the death penalty. Similar to Max, he also decided that instead of taking a plea of insanity, he would plead guilty and attempt to sway the judge in his closing statement. His closing statement is lengthy, like Max’s, but more importantly they share the same method of argument. Darrow does not appeal to the innocence of his clients, but instead attacks the idea of the death penalty. In one poignant section he states:
But your Honor… I know the future is with me, and what I stand for here; not merely for
the lives of these two unfortunate lads…I am pleading for life, understanding, charity,
kindness, and the infinite mercy that considers all. I am pleading that we overcome Veramendi 28
cruelty with kindness and hatred with love. I know the future is on my side. Your Honor
stands between the past and the future. You may hang these boys; you may hang them by
the neck until they are dead. But in doing it you will turn your face toward the past…I am
pleading for the future; I am pleading for a time when hatred and cruelty will not control
the hearts of men (Darrow 84).
His rhetoric is in a very similar style to that of Max who appeals to the cruelties of a racially exclusionary system that destroys the psyche of African American men.
Max’s entire argument rests on the futility of justice in this case and is a thinly veiled plea for reform. It asks how there can be justice in a society where you are not considered a human being and exist in a system that looks at you as a representation of a stereotype. Max asks the court during his speech, “how can I make my voice heard with effect above the hungry yelping of hounds on the hunt?" (Wright 485). He asks them this because he is trying to show that his position as an officer of the court is threatened by the angry white mob that literally surrounds the trial. The fairness of trials comes from its theoretically unbiased and untainted state, which allows it to be the arbitrator of justice. Hence, trials are supposed to be free from outside bias and public opinion to render true and fair justice. Bigger’s trial, though, has already been considered and judged by everyone in society, let alone the legal system. He was guilty before he was anything else in his world because he is powerless against society. There is no jury of his peers in that courtroom that day, only misdirected perpetual anger and shame. This is also why the women in Glaspell’s story do not give over their evidence about Minnie’s crime to the men. They know what will happen to Minnie in a court of law, and they know it would not meet any definition of fairness. She would be found guilty and sentenced to die, just like Bigger is sentenced to die by the end of Native Son despite Max’s efforts. Veramendi 29
VIII. Conclusion
Ultimately, it is imperative to reflect on one final similarity between Wright and
Glaspell’s both works, which is that they are both fictions based on reality. Bigger, according to
Wright, was born from real experience, people, and events. He is made of reality and stereotype, out of grief and anger, out of sheer experience with discrimination. Bigger is a person, according to Wright, and this should not be taken for granted. His essay, “How Bigger was Born,” accounts for all these origins and the meaning behind this character and novel. In it, he finds that “If [he] had known only one Bigger, [he] would not have written Native Son,” so frequently did Bigger’s spirit appear in his neighbors or bullies (Wright 5). He writes about five different examples of
“Bigger’s” in his life, numbering each one, all different but all bringing a uniquely dangerous and broken aspect of their personality. However, Wright also saw Bigger in history beneath the restrictiveness of the Jim Crow Laws and in the fear of lynch mobs. Bigger’s story is ultimately a fictional piece, but Wright did not invent anything new or out of the ordinary for the novel.
Bigger is a product of his environment and so is this novel, which Wright wrote to provide a narrative for the pervasiveness of racial disclination in the United States.
Likewise, Glaspell’s “A Jury of Her Peers” is based on an actual case about a woman who killed her husband. The Hossack murder occurred on December 1, 1900, and Glaspell was the investigative reporter assigned to the case (Schechter 179). She followed the sentencing and conviction of Mrs. Hossack, who reportedly bludgeoned her husband with an axe, following a long-standing history of spousal abuse (Schechter 179). Unlike Minnie, her case went to trial with a jury of entirely men, and public opinion was almost entirely against her (Schechter 179).
Mrs. Hossack was labelled as insane and any woman who did testify actually testified against her
(Schechter 181). “A Jury of Her Peers,” which is so centered around female solidarity, can be Veramendi 30
seen as a kind of feminist correction that attempts to fix the issues or bias that Glaspell saw in the
Hossack case. Therefore, these texts are not only referencing past historical traditions, they are reacting to the reality of their own world. These works were inspired by real life cases of people who were not being seen or represented in the world, much less by the legal system.
Works that still hold relevance in our lives today, especially in the face of these aforementioned movements that so define our modern era. The #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter movements’ core strength is to take common and problematic issues outside of the shadows and bring them out to center stage. Their central strategy is one that consists of knowing Treyvon
Martin’s name and seeing the horrors that were done to him and that were inflicted on his family, because of racial profiling. They are about knowing unequivocally that sexual harassment exists, and that we must end it. It is about recognizing that these issues have been happening for centuries and that problems ranging from racial profiling to microaggression are all linked.
Wright in Native Son chose to show the complete and unadulterated destruction of Bigger to convey the atrocities that can occur in an unjust legal system. Glaspell, though, chose to correct these injustices by bypassing the traditional legal system and giving Minnie a well-deserved fictional jury of her peers that promotes solidarity. Thus, both texts show the futility of seeking justice in a system that does not acknowledge inherent divisions of power that are prompted by biased societal prejudices and norms.
Veramendi 31
Works Cited
Baatz, Simon. “Leopold and Loeb's Criminal Minds.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution,
1 Aug. 2008, www.smithsonianmag.com/history/leopold-and-loebs-criminal-minds-
996498/.
Bates, Karen Grigsby. “A Look Back At Trayvon Martin's Death, And The Movement It
Inspired.” NPR, NPR, 31 July 2018,
www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/07/31/631897758/a-look-back-at-trayvon-
martins-death-and-the-movement-it-inspired.
Bennett, Jessica. “The 'Click' Moment: How the Weinstein Scandal Unleashed a Tsunami.” The
New York Times, 5 Nov. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/11/05/us/sexual-harrasment-
weinstein-trump.html.
Burnett, Zaron. “Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, and the Politics of Disruption: A
Conversation with Joshua...” Medium, Medium, 15 Oct. 2017,
medium.com/@zaron3/black-panthers-black-lives-matter-and-the-politics-of-disruption-a-
conversation-with-joshua-6755a2ed9707.
Darrow, Clarence. Attorney Clarence Darrow's Plea for Mercy in the Franks Case. Wilson Pub.
Co., 1924.
Glaspell, Susan. “A Jury of Her Peers.” N.p: Every-week Magazine, 1917. Web.
Guarino, Janine. “Holding up the Mirror: Recognizing and Dismantling the ‘White Savior
Complex.’” Medium, Mama Hope, 11 Sept. 2018, medium.com/mama-hope/holding-up-
the-mirror-recognizing-and-dismantling-the-white-savior-complex-61c04bfd6f38. Veramendi 32
McGuire, Danielle L. “‘Power to the Ice Pick!’” At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women,
Rape, and Resistance- a New History of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to
the Rise of Black Power.” Vintage Books, 2010, pp. 202–228.
Schechter, Harold. True Crime: an American Anthology. Penguin Random House, 2008.
Wells-Barnett-Barnett, Ida B. "The Red Record." The Norton Anthology of African American
Literature. By Henry Louis Gates and Valerie Smith. 3rd ed. Vol. 1. New York: W.W.
Norton, 2014. 534-44. Print.
Wright, Richard. Native Son. New York City: Harper Collins, 2009. Print.