Randall Kenan’s A Visitation of Spirits tells the story of Horace Cross, who is aged sixteen. Cross is plagued by problems that nag his impressionable spirit and sit in his mind in the form of loathsome demons. In one night, this climaxes into a horrible and tragic transformation. Reflecting on the fate of Horace, Reverend James Green (known as ‘Jimmy’) questions the values of the community in which they live and may have caused- even if by mere neglect- Horace’s fate. Jimmy focuses on the vicious cycle of poverty a community that hopes for the better, but is in itself an unfavorable ground for the good to sprout and grow. Horace becomes the tragic symbol of the cycle. Placed and interpreted within the American context, this is a story of self-reflection, asking the black community to reflect on their own roles and responsibilities in their own fate in the past and present, and what implications this may have in the future. For instance, Horace is condemned for being homosexual. The irony is that the black community has been the American community on the receiving end of the worst of the American discrimination and oppression that comes with it. Yet, the homophobia among the black community now marks the oppressions of the black person by his own people, causing more rifts among a people who need what little togetherness they can get. Without saying much, this appears to be a rather straightforward theme. Maybe it is because of this that I find the words of Anne (Jimmy’s wife to be by then) to Jimmy confusing. She says, “Love? Come on preacherman. Don’t you see? Your idea of ‘love’ is a foolish Western concept the white man has created to enslave- who? Me. Woman. No, sir, Mr. Man, I’m my own woman” (Kenan 176).
This talk by Anne becomes confusing at the end of the book. It does not stand out any more conspicuously than a lot of other parts of the book. Still, it seems to stand out in a special way, especially in relation to the black people setting themselves free, including from the boundaries that confine their sexuality. But more so, Anne’s words become confusing after reading a critical analysis of the text by David Shane Wallace. However, I must note, Wallace’s analysis was not necessarily what got me thinking about it. It only pointed it out, making me more conscious its potential implications to the interpretation of the text’s ultimate theme.
Now I do know that the writer- whether intending to or by way of the unconscious that forces itself to the fore- aims to explore a theme and say something about it through the characters. In this story, as already noted above, explores homophobia among the black community. In this book, it seems that Kenan, through Horace’s tragedy but also through more critical examination, wishes to pique the black community towards a change in attitude. Particularly, the text questions the black community’s notions of what might be termed as sexual purity.
According to Wallace (99), this talk on Anne’s part represents her freedom. As far as Wallace (99) is concerned, Anne has denied Jimmy’s ‘white’ terminology and by it enacts the redefinition of black relationships, including sexuality, so that she reclaims and reinscribes black sexual practices. In the end, Wallace (99) bemoans the fact the Horace seems to lack this ability to reclaim himself.
However, I find this very much confusing. As noted above, this book is a call to the black community to reflect on itself and what their actions are being the cause of the same problems they complain about. But to do this, the black community must- at least for a while- remove the white community fully from the picture. The idea is to have the black community understand who they are and decide where to go. Bringing the white community into the picture, it seems to me, is an unnecessary distraction. Moreover, it seems to be as double standards. This may be what DuBois (67) refers to as ‘double consciousness’- that is, the tendency to look at oneself through the eyes of the other. According to DuBois (67) this may be a reflection of one’s self-doubt, an inward fear on their part that they may be inferior to the other, so that the ‘other’ is key in how they see themselves. In this respect, what may seem like a criticism may actually be an adoration of some sort, some of form of inferiority complex.
Indeed, throughput the text Kenan explores in detail this ‘double consciousness’, the irony of the black community’s infatuation with the white people and their culture. The people at the Tims Creek exhibit white-like aspirations. The biggest irony is that Horace’s mother, Rose, becomes the black sheep of the family because she defies the white-like aspirations of her family. She is, therefore, excluded. Yet, Horace also becomes excluded for- if it may be said- the very opposite, at least to his family. The family thinks his sexuality is a white man’s thing, that no black man can be a homosexual on his own except by imitating the white.
Generally, Wallace (100-102) too seems to laugh off this insistence on the black community to look at themselves from the point of view of the white people. To make his point, he observes that the people of Tims Creek, “despite their white-like aspirations both despise and fear white individuals” (Wallace 102).
Anne’s speech, it seemed and still does seem to me, was/is no different from the rest of them. I mean, why would her comment be seen as a symbol of freedom and not double consciousness? Besides, Anne rather politicizes a rather small matter (love) that does not need politicization. In fact, looking at many cases in the book, it seems that this tendency for politicization of issues- founded on a black/white dichotomization- is the problem for many blacks. This insistence on distinguishing ‘us’ from ‘them’ may be the same reason that the black community, as portrayed in the book, is becoming self-destructing.
I have not exactly found a concrete answer to this question that has kept nagging me. I still wonder what makes Anne’s case special in a way that others are not. Thankfully, though, my confusion has piqued my curiosity, my hunger to know. I have wanted to prove this point true more than I may have wanted to prove it wrong, especially since I would like to think Wallace knows what he is talking about. But most importantly, I think literature is a discipline that gives freedom to personal interpretation. In the end, the question is whether one makes a convincing argument or not. Wallace’s does not say much about his premise. However, that is not to say he does not make a convincing argument. The limitations may be the result of his assumption that the reader knows the rest. But these limitations are part of why this statement becomes more confusing because I do not find the answer(s) from Wallace. Unfortunately, I have not been lucky to find answers anywhere else. But I think I have a theory for Wallace’s premise.
My theory is that Anne is one character (like Horace) who seems to set herself from the rest. To her, Jimmy is part of the whole crowd that suffers from double consciousness. This may be true or not. However, Jimmy seems to lack a solid ground. He is still confused and questions the world around him. But when one is confused and lack a solid ground, they are more likely to go with the majority. But that notwithstanding, Anne’s reference to the white people is not exactly the same way that others see them. The white people to her are a superior metric for comparison. Instead, her reference to the white people may be her way to emphasize her sense of belonging, her way to ‘own’ herself. In other words, this may be her way to laugh off other black people’s obsession with the white people, which would make her one of the key symbols of Kenan’s goal and theme. In this respect, by telling Jimmy, “Your idea of ‘love’ is a foolish Western concept the white man.” (Kenan 176), she does not reject love, but the exercise of it among the white people. But at the same time, it is her rejection of the black community’s view of it, particularly how it is marred by a mind set out to do anything anti-white. The ‘love’ she pictures is one that fits with her vision of community and relationship, a vision that rejects being subject to someone else and having to abide by their views of what constitutes the ‘normal’ (race, community, relationship, sexuality). Wallace calls it an attempt to “renounce the dominant culture’s rigid designations” (99). It is a vital call for the black community to free themselves from the shackles they have imposed on themselves.
Now I accept that I may not be right in my interpretation. But it is the only thing that makes sense in this case; the only justification for Wallace’s (99) premise that makes sense to me. But regardless, it is important to me that my confusion with Anne’s statements- viewed against the ultimate theme of Kenan’s text, including the exploration of the black people’s unacknowledged obsession with the white communities got me this far in my interpretation of the text. I have learnt an important lesson, especially how conjecture can be an important tool towards the interpretation of literary texts. One thing leads to another and gets my imagination rolling. For example, my study of Wallace’s analysis gets me to DuBois theory and concept of double consciousness. In the end, my confusion provided an inspiration for learning, and although I have not exactly arrived at an answer, I have gained a lot of knowledge on literary analysis, but also on this particular text, Kenan’s A Visitation of Spirits.
Works Cited
DuBois, William E.B. The Souls of Black Folks, Dover Thrift Editions. Dover
Publications, 1994. Print.
Kenan, Rendal. A Visitation of Spirits. New York: Vintage, 2000. Print.
Wallace, David S. ‘“Come the Final Throwdown, What is s/he First, Black or
Gay?”: Revolutionary Arguments in Randall Kenan’s A Visitation of Spirits and Me’shell Ndegeocello’s Cookie: the Anthropological Mixtape’, American, 4.1 (2006), 95-110. Print.
