Be Bigger: We must revolt by releasing Richard
Wright’s Native Son within us all.
By Robert Powell
Because Bigger Thomas’ plight in Richard Wright’s Native Son is universally ours—we
should all “Be Bigger” and exercise his rebellion within us by fighting against the social and
institutionalized system--no matter how small
or insignificant it may seem. This idea is both
individual and communal and holds true for all
of humanity. Just like Native Son, “Being Bigger”
transcends across cultural, racial, gender, class and
socioeconomic boundaries. It goes far beyond
mere racism, slavery and negative stereotypes of
African-American men. These socially rebellious
and ruggedly individual means are necessary to
accomplish our communal end—more prosperity and happiness for all of us as individuals and
citizens of the world How and why should we
celebrate and emulate an African-American murderer in a work of fiction?
How and why does he have anything in common with us? The purpose of this essay is not just to answer the above questions. This
study will make parallels to the character Bigger
Thomas with us (common humanity). It will
also give the reader a sense of empathy showing a
shared necessary rebellion on the way to a feasible
blueprint for “Being Bigger.”
In examining this blueprint, we
must realize that the most vital aspect of the text
and Bigger’s characterization is not where he
begins or ends. Although where he ends is significant, the deep inferior lows in self-esteem, respect
and human dignity that Bigger rises from are
most important. “Being Bigger” is about transcendence. Dennis Sullivan et al. points out that,
“. . . In far too many instances students are not
being taught about the transformative dimensions
of Native Son. . . we hope that they will be more
inclined to read this classic in light of its transformative, restorative, personalist dimensions” (422).
1
The genius of Native Son is its ambiva-
lently hybrid nature of artistic categorization. It is
a naturalistic novel transformed into an existential novel; it is a social novel transformed into a
psychological one. And finally, it is a communal
novel transformed into an individualistic one.
While it may not be adequately categorized only
as the types that it transforms into—these are ultimately the most important aspects of the work.
Robert Butler contends that, “Bigger is strongly
conditioned by environment and able in certain
ways to transform himself and his surroundings
through consciousness and free will. . . by the end
of the novel, Bigger is in control of his inward
life and therefore can control himself in the outer
world. Despite the fact that he will soon be executed, he is psychologically liberated in knowing
that he can meet his death in a controlled and
dignified way after he has come to human terms
with himself and others” (110).
While the social forces are very
relevant, existentialism is most important in the
work. Morals do not matter but the way in which
we strive to “Be Bigger” does matter most. Aime
J. Ellis argues that, understanding Bigger’s rage
as, at times, “enabling” causes us to reconsider
his humanity not simply in naively objective or
positivistic terms but as an assertion of his dignity,
self-worth, and “somebodiness” in a world that
simultaneously dehumanizes him and renders him
invisible. . . Bigger’s humanity is inextricably tied
to the pursuit of his freedom. . . might one read
Bigger’s actions as nothing less than ‘revolutionary’ in his attempt to subvert the social and political order of white supremacy and control (186)?
Yes—with the choice of being a good nobody or
evil somebody, he chooses to do and be something that matters to him.
We must do it like Bigger does
it—but in a positive way. Fortunately, today, (as
compared to the Jim Crow era when Native Son
was written) we have a wider range of choices and