Here are the guidelines:
- Reading responses must be AT LEAST 250 words.
- Include your full name at the end of your comments. Unnamed comments will be deleted.
- From the "Comment As" drop-down menu, choose Anonymous, then click "Publish."
- Reading responses are due by midnight on Sundays, no exception.
“A Raisin in the Sun” through the lens of gendered radicalism brings to light the disparities and inequalities plaguing the black community at the height of the U.S cold war. Lorraine Hansberry’s childhood experiences and personal views on racism and classism helped to shape “A Raisin in the Sun”. The play is an intricate quilt sewed together by familial, racial, and financial tension. Hansberry is masterful at displaying the inner workings of a black family living on the edge of prosperity and financial ruin. It is a tale of self-determination and the desire to break free from established norms regarding black people.
ReplyDeleteAs the curtain goes up, we, the audience, are introduced to the Younger family. Their surroundings are meager at best and it is obvious that they are living from hand to mouth as they must share a common bathroom with their neighbors. There is much talk as to a check that should be arriving in the mail. It appears everyone has plans for this money that is coming to them by way of Lena’s deceased husband’s insurance policy. Walter Lee, (Lena’s son) aspires to own a liquor store with his friends. Beneatha, (Lena’s daughter) hopes to continue her college education to become a medical doctor, and Ruth, (Walter’s wife) just wants to get out of the ghetto. Ruth is pregnant and grappling with the notion of abortion as the child would be more of a burden than a blessing. However, it is up to Lena, the matriarch of the family, who holds everyone’s fate in her hands once the check arrives. After much reflection and weighing of possible outcomes, Lena decides to split the money three ways. She puts a down payment on a house in a white neighborhood, which was very taboo for the time. She asks Walter to put some of the money towards Beneatha’s education and the rest, Walter is to open a bank account for himself. So, how did this play out? Walter takes all the money given to him by his mother and loses it to a bad investment, aka one of his business partners absconds with the cash. This is just one of the major storylines running throughout this play, but since we are looking at it through gender it is the one to be discussed more in depth.
In the Erin B. Chapman article, she illustrates the theory of Black Matriarchy and the role it plays in castrating black men. According to this theory, black women’s success outside of the home and familial domination only serve to emasculate black men. So much so that, for a black man to thrive, he has to be emancipated from black women. As absurd as this idea is, it was still worthy enough for Lyndon B. Johnson to mention in his 1965 report, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action.” This notion even makes its way into African American bedrooms stating that the sex lives between black men and women are unsatisfying due to black women not knowing their place in the home, as submissive to their husbands.
When it was all said and done, Lena, the matriarch, with her domineering will saves the day by leading her family in the right direction. Despite the men in the play attempting to demean the women in one way or another, the women prevail. It is not that women set out to dominate their homes, it’s just that sometimes there is no choice but to do so. If the men in their lives aren’t stepping up or even worse, sabotaging the family, that’s when women must look out for what’s best for the family.
Julietta Rivera
I feel as though Raisin in the Sun has had the most relatable characters. It may help that in the modern day race relations and the polarization of people across multiple political axes dominates much of the societal mind space. This play does not present a straw man to bowl over, with Lindner being more of a messenger than an antagonist. He could be played as a much more menacing or oppressive force, but I feel as though having him portrayed as a timid and fearful individual better illustrates the uneasy climate he was coming from. In the final act, the Youngers resolve to step into the unknown future with confidence. This helps to show the strength of the predominantly female family.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Chapman, Hansberry wrote this play with feminist intent, looking over the characters and how each of them interact with each other I can see how that works. Mama serves as the head of the family until she gives that over to Walter, who immediately messes it up by trying to buy into the system. Ruth opposes Walter’s shenanigans and supports her family in both traditionally male and female roles of working out of and in the house, respectively. Beneatha actively strives to attain respect and success in the world, hoping to help others as a doctor. Her distaste for the shallow Murchison helps to illustrate her independence. Asagai does show a counterbalance of the lost culture the family is missing and Beneatha’s desire to immerse herself in it reflects a common theme that has persisted into the modern day. Identity. Hansberry creates an interesting snap shot of an average family hoping for a better future which unfortunately will be a timeless story.
Enrique Perez
A theme that I would like to touch upon in my discussion post that I think is alluded to by both the article and the play, yet is never explicitly given a name, is that of internalized oppression. The article presents this theme in it’s exploration of the “liberal turn in the black freedom movement” which, according to Chapman, allowed for a growing occurrence of using the image of the “black working mothers as scapegoats” (447). I would argue that this is reflected in the character of Walter Lee, who we see actively denounce what he perceives as the follies of “the colored women” and point to these as the cause of many a colored man’s problems (see pages 366-367). I would likewise argue that George Murchison’s character as, what Chapman labels, a “literary exploration of African American ‘babbitry’ or bourgeois complacency” is yet another facet of internalized oppression which Hansberry has manifested within the play (452). Not only does his role highlight the issue of “money values” that Chapman notes is among the “sores” which Hansberry aimed to examine (452), he similarly serves as a foil to Beneatha - the one character who yearns to discover a disconnected identity - by highlighting the extremes of assimilationist ideology.
ReplyDeleteI also thought that it was fascinating that Wilkerson, a scholar noted by Chapman, interpreted Lena Younger as Hansberry’s conduit for “advocacy of patriarchal black male leadership” (448). Personally, my understanding of this character was an empowerment of the African American matriarchal figure. As a character she was invested in the successes of her children and had no issue in disagreeing with the methods and/or ultimate goals of any of them if she saw them as unfit. Lena was outspoken, strategic, and motherly - there was no need for her to forfeit any of these attributes to gain the others and thus exemplifies the flawed perception of the aforementioned black working mother.
Joaquin Castillo
Erin D. Chapman describes the Young family as poor, working class citizens just looking to find the basics for a stable life. Only Walter is looking to find luxuries, having seen many white men white men with what he desires. She states that this makes Walter a unique protagonist, as the typical "hero" in this situation would be simply wanting to battle the difficulties they come across and have a normal life. But Walter wants more than this. He envies what the white men have, ironically making him "selfish" as a poor African American. Many could argue that Walter's desires make him unlikable as a person. With the what he faces and what he sees on a day-by-day basis, it is quite understandable why he feels the way he does. Walter may have a materialistic mindset, but it's brought on by having little as opposed to having much. A materialistic mindset is typically brought on by having everything handed over simply, but Walter's circumstances make it evident that the same can happen in the direct opposite method. Whether or not it makes him selfish is completely irrelevant. He merely wants the life that he feels is completely inaccessible to him. With characters like George Murchison, it doesn't seem that his race is the one thing preventing him from this inaccessible life.
ReplyDeleteMichael McCormick
I thought it was fairly interesting how money is an evident theme or an object that envelopes and surrounds the duration of the play. Not just in the sense that the Younger family is awaiting the $10,000 check and what will happen to it, but certain characters in the play show different perspectives regarding money. For example, Walter Lee’s actions revolve around him trying to get a piece of the check to invest in Willy Harris’ business venture. However, he has a few lines sprinkled here and there that defines how he views currency and it’s blatant to me when he talks to Beneatha or “Bennie”, which is his sister.
ReplyDeleteIn the last scene of the play, Walter Lee tells his sister, “Girl, if you don’t get all them silly ideas out you head! You better marry yourself a man with some loot (442)”. There is even a stage direction that references his behavior in the first scene where he states “ then go be a nurse like other women — or just get married and be quiet (pg. 369)”. Here, we can characterize Walter as somewhat as an analogy of African-American individuals that chased bourgeois ‘money values’ as stated in Chapman’s article (448). In other words, it is inadvisable to be chasing money and believing that it solves everything. The article also states that as the play and Lorraine Hansberry grew in popularity, she emphasized that the African-American community should move toward a “more egalitarian, profound liberation (448)”. Or in other words, something with greater purpose. Bennie is a contrasting character of Walter Lee because since he emphasizes that she should marry rich, she does not feel the same way in the slightest.
In fact, I would argue that there is a minor sub-plot or whatever we may call it in which she is introduced to two contrasting characters of their own, and that is George Murchison and Joseph Asagai. George is the more well-off individual with the “loot” as Walter likes to put it, and Asagai is the foreigner from Nigeria who can be seen as someone with more grassroot or organic upbringings in terms to the African American culture. The reason why is because Asagai is more intertwined with the spiritual and heritage roots compared to George, who can be argued to be someone who has appropriated himself to mainstream culture at the time. Bennie sees more of an attraction with Asagai because of this. It’s also important to note that George is referenced in the play by his name by not only the script but as well as the other characters. On the other hand, Asagai is referenced by his last name and not his first.
She even has this exchange with Ruth where she exclaims that George is rich, thus he cannot be shallow. But Bennie then retorts and explains that men must have other qualities to be a more suitable candidate for her. Bennie can be representative of a composite character of someone in the African American community who is striving for more and trying to give her own people, in this case her family, some momentum for progressions since she also wanted to be a doctor. The want to be educated is an example of her knowing that education and not marrying rich is the advisable approach to a better tomorrow for the minority group. Freedom is not so much as chains and whips, but of mentally becoming more mature and growing.
Another side note that I thought was interesting was how the play’s title is a reference to Langston Hughes’ poem “A Dream Deferred”. It reminded me of a rap album that one of my favorite artists created titled “The Dream Deferred” where he talks about how not selling dope or narcotics means you are making it. Rather, if you leave the criminal lifestyle behind, then that’s when you are really progressing as an individual. It’s also interesting because he makes a reference to Spike Lee being his hero since Lee’s films heavily are influenced by racial struggles. A couple of the lines in “Spike Lee Was My Hero” references the films “He Got Game” and “Do The Right Thing” which have similar themes to the poem and play.
P.J. Hernandez
In Chapman’s article, when analyzing the article of Bennet regarding the supposed black matriarchy, I found so it contradictory to the point where I wondered why he even bothered publishing it in the first place, considering he debunked his own argument. This had mostly to do with studying the different salaries and wages that a black woman receives to compared to white women and black men, which did not surpass, nor were they anywhere near making the same amount or close to the same amount. Articles like these are good to bring to light because we see the hypocrisy and just plain false information brought in when people don’t conform to the social norms of the day. Much like today it is still the case. It may not be as present or obvious as back then, but I would argue that it is still there (such as society’s expectation for men and women to start a family).
ReplyDeleteThe feminism within the play, I would say, was there but was very subtle and not so on the nose. Because the play does trick you to think that Walter is the protagonist, he is used as a sort of conduit to explore the play’s themes. I’ve always had the belief that a story is only as interesting as the characters that drive it forward. So, although Walter acted as a de facto protagonist, the other characters prove to be just as important to drive the story and produce the themes to be explored in the play. Whether it is Walter wrestling with his toxic masculinity and trapped in the illusion of the happiness he feels that he and his family should desire, or Beneatha’s inner conflict of choosing a path right for her and that won’t make her feel trapped in her own life (much like many women, white and black, felt at the time).
Mirella Martinez
In the article, Chapman talks about money values and how Hansberry viewed them when writing her play, “Hansberry lamented that ‘the desire for the possession of things has rapidly replaced among too many of us the impulse for the possession of ourselves, for freedom’.” This reminded me of a part in the play where Mama is talking to Walter, “so now it's life. Money is life. Once upon a time freedom used to be life - now it's money. I guess the world really so change. “ (339) Throughout the play the reader is made aware of the importance money plays with the Youngers. Each family member is living their life in hopes to make their fantasies a reality. Walter wants to make something out of himself. He’s tired of being a servant to his boss. Walter reminded me of Willy from , “The Death of a Salesman”, how they both share similar dreams. What separates Walter and Willy is that Walter actually takes a stand and defends his family. He doesn’t just try to end his life and borrow money from his neighbor. The moment Walter declines the offer from Lindner his character development surpasses Willy’s. It’s crazy how life insurance has played a role in these last two plays. Both Biff and Willy got the cold shoulder when trying to pursue a life of a salesman while Walter got played by his friend Wily.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the play I noticed that the author was aware of the discrimination going on at the time and implemented it into her play. Hansberry plays with the American Dream again like previous authors, while educating the reader with the life of an African American family trying to make it out in an all white neighborhood. I also noticed sexist remarks made by Walter, many sexist remarks. I liked Ruth’s character throughout the play and felt bad for all the verbal harassment Walter threw it her. He pointed out to her that, “this is just what is wrong with the colored woman in this world…. Don't understand about building their men up and making’em feel like they somebody.” ( 367) Walter keeps this sexist role up further by crushing his sister’s dream in her face, “who the hell told you you had to be a doctor? If you crazy bout messing round with sick people - then go be a nurse like other women - or just get married and be quiet.” (369) I saw a pattern with people and fufilling their dreams while reading the play. What Mama said really hit me in the feels, “there ain't nothing worth holding on to, money, dreams, nothing else - if it means - if it means it's going to destroy my boy.” (411) Those were some strong words she said to Walter. I did not like Walter at all during the story, I somewhat felt bad for Willy in the other play but not Walter. Even when he redeemed himself in the end of the play would not hide the fact he lost all the money his mother gave him and treated his wife like shit.
In the article, Margaret Wilkerson , “argued that Hansberry set up the character Lena
Younger as a matriarchal figure who is critiqued and learns to relinquish her unduly
powerful familial role over the course of the play...she makes way for the affirmation of her son Walter Lee’s patriarchal aspiration. Thus, Wilkerson posited Hansberry as an advocate of patriarchal black male leadership.” I believe Mama to be the most important character in the play she basically holds all the power since what everyone in the play wants is money, All she wants is to keep them together. Even though Walter isn’t the best person to be used as an example for a leader, he does do his family justice in front of the man.
Danny Olivarez
I was surprised at how relevant A Raisin in the Sun still is in its point of how people value money as a solution instead of as a tool. Both the article and the play, mention Walter Younger wants to buy yachts and pearls. Lorraine Hansberry, however, explains Walter, “thinks he wants yachts and pearls because this is what he sees all around him (Chapman 454).
ReplyDeleteIn today’s society there are still many Walter Youngers. However, rather than wanting Yachts and peals, people today want and pay for many different kinds of overpriced items like $800 Gucci slides, children’s or babies’ designer shoes and clothes which won’t fit after a couple of weeks, and $30 for a Supreme brick with no use. Similar to Walter, many people want these kinds of purposeless items because many people on social media or YouTubers have these items.
Besides this, I was a also a little surprised at Hansberry’s comments about communism. She is said to be, “… shaped by communism and black nationalism as well as feminism and her queer sexuality … (Chapman 456).” However, she does not seem to advocate for radical change.
In fact, I could not find where in the play there are signs of her communist beliefs. Despite this, there was a particular line from Chapman’s article which stood out to me about how she, “advocated a total dismantling of racial capitalism in favor of a fundamental socioeconomic equality (453).” This makes me wonder , by communism does it possibly mean that she wants to even out the unfair wage gaps, career opportunities, and other kinds of privileges? During the play, for example, we see characters like Beneatha who want to do well in life but cannot afford school. However, if the opportunities were slightly more fair, she might have a better chance at becoming a doctor.
-Zugay Trevino
One thing I noticed throughout the play is how these individual dreams/plans these characters have don’t pan out as effectively both for the individual and/or the family when compared to the family dream, the “collective dream”. The family’s long-held dream is to move out of the apartment and find something better. Lena (Mama) wants a new house (a shared dream with her husband) in Clybourne Park for she believes the greater space will benefit the family. Ruth agrees with Mama’s dream, believing that a bigger house will allow them better living conditions for herself and her son with her husband Walter, Travis. Walter wants to get a liquor store, as he believes it will solve his family’s problems and provide them with money for life. Beneatha (a rather unique name in particular) wants to be a doctor, and she also wants to help on the issue of the oppressive circumstances they currently live in and attempt to fix that. None of these individual dreams work out too well for the family as we see throughout the play. In the end, the only dream that truly works out is the “collective dream”, the uniting dream, emphasizing the importance of family, a powerful concept especially in these times of rampant discrimination against people of color.
ReplyDeleteNow, onto Beneatha and her name. I find it interesting that such a name was used for two particular reasons: the character she is and the ideals she represents. For her character, she is a young black woman seeking to go to medical school (which may have been an absolute rarity in this time period), something completely beneath the societal norms of the time period. She rejects a suitor for being blind to the problems of race, another issue that went beneath society’s radar back then. Now, for the ideals she represents, Beneatha is shown throughout as a character that embodies progressivism (a burgeoning view, mind you), a view that is still clearly beneath the eyes of society at the time. I find it interesting how Hansberry uses Beneatha throughout the play. While she (Hansberry) brings focus to the issues through the events that happen in the play, Beneatha is the character that gives these issues their due importance (in the sense that she is the one actively pursuing these). Everyone in the family is pursuing an Americanized vision of freedom, a nigh bastardized version of the true freedom Beneatha seeks out. That is just a small reason why I find the combination of Beneatha’s character and her name so interesting.
Pedro Cano