The Invisibility of the Invisible Man

I finally finished reading Invisible Man last night and, once the action started picking up, it turned out to be an interesting book. However, I still think that the narrator could have condensed his story into 200 fewer pages. Although I was reading the novel closely, I had a hard time understanding the narrator’s theories. What did he really mean when he said he was invisible? When first realizes his invisibility (after the Tod Clifton funeral), the narrator says that he is going to lie to both sides—the Brotherhood and the black people of Harlem. Still, how does that make him invisible? Perhaps, he is trying to say that no one really cares about what he does and his actions won’t affect the people of Harlem. Or maybe he realizes that he is actually outside history because he is just a pawn in the Brotherhood game. The narrator keeps repeating that he is invisible, but I don’t have a full grasp on what he means. Hopefully, our five seminars will clear up some of my confusion.

Towards the end, the narrator reminded me a lot of Frankenstein in that there was a duality to his character. More specifically, the narrator says that he is both the victim and the victimizer. While he is lying to the black people of Harlem (the victims), he is also hurt by his own lying. Just like Frankenstein, the narrator is creating something, albeit intangible, that is destroying himself. The only difference is that the narrator knows what he is doing. I wonder whether this victimization and duality of character lead the narrator to have angry feelings to the white people in particular. In one section, he says that all the white peoples he encountered (Bledsoe and Mr. Norton and Brother Jack) because one big entity. What does he feel towards that entity? Does he feel like Ras the Destroyer who hates all white people? Or does he simply feel like white interests will always prevail? I think that the narrator does have a negative view especially after he discovered that Jack wrote the letter that he was going “too fast.” I think the reason that he goes into the whole was to hide from all the people that are seeking to use him. In fact, I think that the narrator was afraid.

In the epilogue, I thought the most significant scene was between Mr. Norton and the narrator. It was ironic that Mr. Norton doesn’t even remember his destiny now, showing that Mr. Norton never really cared about the welfare of the black college student. Their interaction reminds me of Brer Rabbit, where the narrator is the rabbit, or slave. As the rabbit or slave, the narrator seems to trick Mr. Norton, a sly fox, out of making the narrator part of his scorecard. The end still brings up important questions. Does this mean that the narrator is successful at the end? Has the narrator truly and happily “plunged out of history”? Is he representative of the entire black race?