The Representation of Tricksters in the Works of Charles W. Chesnutt

Fraud, con- serviceman, and hustler ar all young day terms to place the age old character in African American literature known as the cheating. directlys working definition of a cheating is genius who swindles or plays tricks often a poi discussionous public common fig in myth or homelore, who typically makes up for physical weakness through craftiness and subversive humor. In African American literature the role of the swindle is a reoccurring theme, especially in the time period spanning from post Civil contend to the Harlem Renaissance.During sla rattling and the years that followed the image of a chess changed from a humorous amoral soma to a imposture and sociablely conscious icon. Charles W. Chesnutt is a primary subject of an author, who faithful employs the trickster root in umteen of his published works. Traditionally, the role of trickster often presents itself when on that point is a powerless group who longs to transcend an autocratic social order (Jefferies, Schramm 20). In African American literature, the trickster is often depicted as some atomic human action 53 who has the ability to manipulate situations in his/her favor, despite having small-minded or no power.Rhonda B. Jefferies states that the primary goal of the trickster in is social nonconformity by redefining the norms of intent and existence in mainstream American society (Jefferies, Schramm 20). Since its profligate in West African culture, the trickster figure has evolved from a folklore icon, mainly in the form or various animals, to an precedent whose behavior is both self-contradictory and complex. The tricksters reoccurring appearance in African American folklore, narratives, poems, novels and bulk culture is no coincidence.It is the tricksters involvement of wisdom, cunning or power in an strive to redefine social order that makes him/her such an sweet icon. The trickster character serves as an inspirational figure for the socially oppressed a nd has gather ups on umteen forms when uttered in past and present literature. Many African American folk tales, especially those from s show uphern unite States, include the appearance of a trickster. In Brer pika Tricks Brer Fox Again, the trickster takes on a determinate form of a clever just now idle rabbit.In this tale the rabbit becomes stuck in a headspring and finagle his way out by win over the suspicious thrust to help him ply. He manipulates the fox to get into the well under false pretenses. By convincing Brer Fox that in that respect is an abundance of tilt he needs help catching and transporting out of the well, Brer rabbit was able to leverage an escape, consequentially go away the fox in his place. It is the rabbits vigorous wit that makes him a quintessential trickster figure in many folk tales across a number of cultures. However, Brer Rabbit is just sensation of many exposures of a trickster rabbit in folk tales and stories throughout hi fiction. A more modern depiction of a rabbit trickster is Looney tunes Bugs bunny. The ways in which Bugs utilizes his physical endurance and tracky of disguise to sell his arch enemy Elmer Fudd is a playful reading when compared to those in African American literature and folklore. The consolidation of the trickster in modern culture, whether it be in the form of animal or man, is just one demonstration of the many ways in which this best-selling(predicate) character transcends time and culture, to get become one of the most reoccurring archetypes in African American literature.Charles W. Chesnutts relationship with the trickster archetype is most ostensible in his array of short stories with the characterization of Uncle Julius. Uncle Julius appeared in seven of the thirteen short stories that make up Chesnutts The Conjured Women. In the collection of stories, Uncle Julius often conjures up his tales from old folklore, in an attacked to persuade or manipulate certain situations to his benefit.The description of Uncle Julius interaction with the outho intention and Annie, the northern white couple implicated in buying the grape vineyard Julius inhabits, in the The Goophered Grapevine, is a classic prototype of Chesnutts employment of the trickster motif. From Uncle Julius branch impression, the audience is under the impression that Julius carriage is to provide theatric and entertainment rather than fact or insight. His performance begins with the eating of the scuppernong grapes and ends with his fantastical account on the vineyard came to be bewitched.John, the white northern gentlemen interested in buying the vineyard, is instantly skeptical upon concussion Uncle Julius disregard Uncle Julius account by stating At first the current of his memory or imagination- seemed somewhat gloomful but as his embarrassment wore off, his language flowed more than freely, and the story acquired more perspective and coherence (Chesnutt 607). The use of the word imagination is a clear exponent that Uncle Julius is believed to be telling fiction. John goes on to foster prove his disbelief when he goes against Uncle Julius suggestion and buys the vineyard, and ulterior makes a considerable profit off.John however does take sympathy for the man who had lived and profited off the land and hired him as a coachman. While Uncle Julius is one of Chesnutts more memorable characters, he is by no means the only representation of the trickster motif in Chesnutts works. Grandison, from The short-lived of Grandison is a nonher example of a trickster character from Chesnutts collection entitled The Wife of his Youth and Other Stories of the wile Line. In this story, Grandison is a knuckle down from a grove in Kentucky, who successfully deceives his overlords, Colonel and dickhead Owens, on a number of occasions.His first act of trickery is when he is being questioned by his old master by assuring Colonel Owens of his subjectment on the planta tion and his come down with the anti-slavery ideals of northern abolitionist. Colonel Owens intentions were to select a slave his son could bring up north, who had proven to be resistive to abolitionist ideals and the prospect of running away. To Colonel Owens elation, Grandisons answers non only confirmed his view of a reciprocally benefits of slavery but went above and beyond to give a conceivably genuine appreciation of the resources and life style on the plantation.He went on questioned Grandison about the fairness of his sermon and the kindness of his master before promising him a bead necklace for his future wife and deeming him abolitionist-proof. Although the interaction expound was only a brief portion of the story it proves to be a pivotal moment in the plot and leaves the audience to assume that Grandison is loyal slave with no intention of running away. But, as we subsequently find out, Grandison was not at all uneducated to the ideals of abolitionism and actua lly aspired to be a free man.He eventually achieves his goal as we see in the very last chapter but not without an unexpected contort Grandison then goes on to successfully deceive his adolescent master, son of a bitch Owens, and forges his loyalty several times during their travels to reinvigorated York, Boston, and eventually Canada. Throughout the journey, Dick Owens provides the Grandison with a number of opportunities to escape by leaving him alone on many occasions and supplying him with money that he could easily utilize to run away. Once Dick Owens realizes Grandison too dense to run away, or so he thinks, he silicates the help of local abolitionist, by writing an nonymous letter. However, Grandison unwaveringly loyal puts a speedily sidetracks Owens ploy to unblock his fathers slave. solar day after day Grandison continues report to his young master every morning and night, leaving Owen to pursue more drastic measures. So, Dick Owens decides to leave Grandison alone for a couple of days, with one hundred dollars to his disposal, in a sly attempt to get Grandison to runaway. Upon his re phone number, Dick Owens finds his efforts were unsuccessful, and with much frustration and annoyance decides to take one last attempt by venturing to Canada, where slaves are free.Nevertheless, Grandison faithfully follows his master orders and does not attempt to runaway, despite the fact there are no laws binding Grandison to Dick Owens in Canada. At this point, the young master decides to gives up his efforts and solicits tierce men to kidnap Grandison. During this exchange Owens escapes and return to Kentucky alone. Dick Owens concludes that Grandison is too ignorant to recognize his opportunity for independence and goes on to marry the motive behind his attempt at nobility, Charity Lomax.Once again it is not until the closing chapter that the audience learns it was Dick Owens and his father who proved to be most ignorant. In the final chapter, Grandison surprisingly returns to the plantation tattered and exhausted from his journey back to Kentucky. He recounts his story of being gagged and dragged to the gloomy depth of a Canadian forest, where he was locked in a chantey and given only bread and water. He appeases his meddling spectators by ending his story with his heroic escape and return to the plantation, all the magical spell never unveil his true motives.It is not until Grandison, along with his new wife, family and friends disappears that his intentions to liberate true intentions are revealed. Once thought to be a model servant, blinded by his loyalty and loyal dependence, Grandison outsmarts both his masters, by playing into slave dealer stereotypes and common misperception of the south. Grandisons successful escape with family and friends exposes him as the true trickster. Because of his convincing portrayal of an ignorant and content slave, and willful patients he was ultimately able to turn the tables on his master s and end up the captain in an unlikely turn of events.When comparing the forepart of the trickster in The Goophered Grapevine and The Passing of Grandison, there are few parallels between the both stories. The normal theme of a southern black man deceiving his white superiors apparent in both, but the similarities stop. The two main stories are vastly different in respects to how each trickster if portrayed. Because the audience in The Goophered Grapevine is warned very on early on to be wary of Uncle Julius credibility, he is at a disadvantage.However, Grandison has a very different innovation because he first enters under the impression that he is one of the most loyal and trustworthy slave on the plantation. On the one hand, we have Uncle Julius Characterization as suspicious figure throughout the story from commencement ceremony to end, and on the other hand there is Grandison, who appears to be a very pious, simple minded slave with no ulterior motives. Another differenc e between the two stories is that theatricality proves to be Uncle Julius main downfall, while somehow becoming Grandisons greatest asset.The introduction and characterization, of Uncle Julius and Grandison, manipulates the audience perception and ultimately determines their success in deceiving and manipulating their audience for their own personal benefit. The trickster, whether presented in modern cartoon or in tradition folktale, is an archetype that continues to reappear in art and literature. The classic depiction of a trickster as a rabbit in old folklore and myths while common is not the only form a trickster may take.Overtime and across cultures, the definition of a trickster changes, but not so much so that it ineffectual to provide an entertaining lesson. The appeal of the trickster to African American writers is the theme of an oppressed group overcoming the challenges of social norms. Charles W. Chesnutt is a prime example of the tricksters mass appeal, in African Amer ican literature. By representing the trickster as Uncle Julius and Grandison in The Goophered Grapevine and The Passing of Grandison, Chesnutt adds to the long history of the trickster as an icon.Work Cited 1. Chesnutt, Charles W. publications Of The Reconstruction To The New Negro Renaissance, 1865-1919. The Norton Anthology of African American Literature. Ed. Henry L. Gates and Nellie Y. McKay. 2nd ed. New York, Ny W. W. Norton &, 2004. 604-12. Print. 2. Schramm, Susan L. , and Rhonda B. Jeffries. African American Trickster Representations in the Work of Romare Bearden. JSTOR. JSTOR, Sept. 2000. Web. 29 Nov. 2010. http//www. jstor. org/stable/3193835