Invisible Man Ralph Ellison Character Analysis

“Invisible Man” by Ralph Ellison presents a main character who is invisible in the sense that people refuse to see him. It is not something physical about him, rather it is that people don’t seem to recognize his existence, even if they see him with their physical eyes. What I notice about the first chapter is that the main character, the invisible man, goes to great lengths to feel alive. Because he is invisible to other people he feels that perhaps he does not exist, or that he is dead. So the invisible man goes to extremes to to feel his aliveness. He fills his home with 1369 electric lightbulbs so that he can enjoy light. He powers these lights with power that he steals from the electric company, and he describes his theft of the power as a “battle” between him and the company.

When the invisible man wants music he desires to listen to it on not one, but five phonographs, so that he can feel the music more clearly. The invisible man feels shunned, deliberately forgotten and ignored, and he feels that this injustice done to him by others gives him the right to act irresponsibly toward the rest of society. For the invisible man these illegal actions are a way of asserting himself.

“Notes from Underground” by Fyodor Dostoevsky is similar in that it presents a character who is also suffering from a classic case of cognitive dissonance. The narrator describes how he desired to become something, either a “hero” or an “insect”. Although the narrator is conscious of all the “beautiful and lofty” things he can’t reach them and instead feels drawn down by some external force that he cannot control. Because what he wants is unattainable he turns to evil and “nasty” behavior, forcing himself to enjoy his own bitterness until he finally feels pleasure in his debased state.

I read “Invisible Man” from the sociological point of view as the original commentary that it was intended to be on the way African-Americans were and still are marginalized by capitalistic society. From this point of view the same message can seen in “Notes from Underground” as the raging narrator complains about his position and how he can’t do anything about it. Although “Invisible Man” was originally written about one particular race neither one of these two passages have to stand for the state of any particular race or people. Rather, in the words of Fyodor Dostoevsky: “such persons… not only may but even must exist in our society, taking into consideration the circumstances under which are society has generally been formed.” Both these passages are intended to speak for all and any people who are ignored, dealt with unjustly, and limited by external forces. When socialization processes are used to prevent any individuals or group from attaining true self actualization and self realization it stunts their feeling of identity and creates the sort of rage and frustration expressed in both “Invisible Man” and “Notes From Underground”.

Interestingly there is also a contrast in the reactions of each character to his state.

The invisible man seems to have a more healthy approach to his situation. He finds outlets for his frustration: filling his home with light and music, waging a secret battle against the power company, even smoking a reefer. In the end the invisible man has a sense of self preservation. He knows that he is in a precarious, even dangerous situation, and he responds with care, deciding never again to take drugs so that he can avoid being “run down with an orange and yellow street car, or a bilious bus.” In contrast to this fairly healthy approach I see a more self destructive attitude from Dostoevsky’s narrator. At the start of the passage the narrator tells readers that he is sick and that he refuses to let doctors treat him “out of wickedness”. Just from the narrator’s description of himself it is obvious that he has not learned how to deal with cognitive dissonance in a healthy manner, and perhaps never will. Rather than finding healthy outlets such as light and music he embraces what he hates and forces himself to enjoy things that he knows make him despicable both to himself and

others.

In addition to their internal personal reactions each character also has a reaction and attitude about the rest of humanity. Both the invisible man and Dostoevsky’s narrator feel that the world is unjust to them. The invisible man definitely resents the fact that other people ignore him. He feels that their ignoring of him is a justification, indeed a natural explanation for his own behavior. For example when the invisible man talks about beating up a man who bumped into him he explains it away as justified and not his own fault. In this respect the invisible man doesn’t really seem to want to do deliberate, serious harm to others, but he occasionally does. When this happens he rationalizes it as the fault of others, as if they made him do what he did.

Dostoevsky’s narrator seems to be more vehement. Unlike the invisible man the narrator of “Notes from Underground” purposely plans to do cruel and bad things. He is nasty to others on purpose, to serve himself. Whereas the things the invisible man does seem like fairly random occurrences, in the heat of the moment, Dostoevsky’s narrator seems to plan ahead. He tells stories such as intimidating the officer who rattled his saber. These things he does require planning and work, they aren’t heat of the moment responses.

The way I see it if the invisible man committed murder it would be a sort of involuntary manslaughter. It might even fall under provocation or diminished capacity manslaughter. On the other hand if Dostoevsky’s narrator committed murder he might get away with diminished capacity manslaughter, but it would be more likely to be interpreted as homicide, planned with malicious intent.

I feel that both passages are useful and fascinating in their depiction of cognitive dissonance and the differing reactions to it. Overall I would summarize the reactions of the invisible man to himself and to the rest of society as not good, but not overly bad either. Certainly he is not completely mentally healthy, but he would probably do alright. On the other hand Dostoevsky’s character is downright frightening. From a psychological point of view he would probably be interpreted as having a dissocial personality disorder.