[In honor of my
about-to-conclude grad
class on Analyzing 21st Century America, a series on great
recent literary works, with the same Af Am lit through-line that I brought to
the class!]
On an innovative
multi-generational novel that reveals the limits and potential of historical fiction.
I’ve written
in a couple different
posts about Alex Haley’s semi-autobiographical historical novel Roots (1976), which at its core represents Haley’s sweeping,
ambitious attempt to tell the multi-generational story of his African American family
from its African and slave trade origins down to his own late 20th
century moment and identity. In so doing, Haley makes the choice to focus a
good deal of his book’s mammoth length on one particular ancestor, Kunta
Kinte, the Gambian man who experiences the turning point experiences of
enslavement, Middle Passage, and life as an enslaved person in the Americas. I
don’t have the book in front of me and so am not sure exactly what percentage focuses
on Kinte, but I remember it being a substantial amount, far more than he
devotes to any other figure or generation between Kinte’s and Haley’s own. The
choice makes sense, since it was this figure whose story began—served as, y’know,
the roots of—the family’s multi-generational African American experience. But
it nonetheless means that a lot of history, both familial and national, gets
more short shrift in Haley’s telling.
Homegoing
(2016), the acclaimed debut novel from Ghanaian American
writer Yaa Gyasi, sets itself an even more ambitious task: telling the
multi-generational story of two (interconnected) families across roughly the
same period as Haley’s book, one family that likewise experiences the Middle
Passage and enslavement in the Americas, one that remains in Africa until the
early 21st century. In contrast to Haley’s focus, Gyasi chooses a
much more overtly sweeping structure: she focuses in each chapter on a new
character and generation (or rather two chapters per generation, one for each
family), meaning that with each such structural shift we are carried forward
something like 25-50 years until we arrive at the 21st century
protagonists. And I can’t lie—the AmericanStudier in me had a hard time with
just how quick and (at least at times) over-simplified those chapter-long
depictions of historical moments can feel; I can’t speak to the African-focused
chapters as much, but the chapters on (for example) Reconstruction and the
Harlem Renaissance feel painfully brief and like they barely scratch the surface
of those hugely complex periods. That’s always gonna be a limit of historical
fiction compared with a nonfictional historical work, of course, but Gyasi’s
structural choice certainly amplifies that issue.
Yet at the same
time, the best historical fiction can both open up the past and connect it to
the present (and us as readers) in ways that, as I’ve long argued
in this space and elsewhere,
are unique and vital to this literary genre. Gyasi’s novel certainly achieves
those goals in numerous ways, and it does so most inspiringly in precisely the
ways that Haley’s book sought to (and in
at least one striking passage did). That is, these glimpses into lives and
stories across centuries of historical periods and two continents, brief and
quick and partial as they may be, made this AmericanStudier feel the idea of
connections—of the links across generations, across history, across an ocean,
between ancestors and descendants, and ultimately between all 21st
century world citizens—as potently and movingly as any literary work I’ve ever
encountered. The British novelist E.M. Forster begged us all (in his 1910 novel
Howard’s End) to “only
connect,” and I’m not sure any task remains more vital more than a century
later. Like much of the best art, Gyasi’s novel can help us find and strengthen
such connections, and that alone makes it a 21st century text well
worth reading.
Next 21C text
tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Other recent literary works you’d highlight?
No comments:
Post a Comment