Narrative Ambiguity In Sonny's Blues
In the article, Words and Music: Narrative Ambiguity in "Sonny's Blues", author Keith Byerman studies the relationship between art and language and the effects that it has in James Baldwin's narrative, Sonny's Blues. In order for Byerman to examine the narrative, he begins under the assumption that there is no conflict resolution between Sonny and his brother, the narrator. "According to Jonathan Culler", in paragraph 2, "resolution can be accomplished in a story when a message is received or a code is deciphered". Byerman believes that the message is not received by the narrator of the story because he is unable to understand properly due to his reliance on skewed language or his own personal biases that he places on the message to change
…show more content…
the meaning.
Byerman begins his analysis by presenting his article in a way that exemplifies the narrator's shortcomings in misinterpreting the message throughout the narration.
For example, the narrator's first interaction with the message came in it's simplest form, when he was reading the newspaper. According to the article, the message was, '"spelled out,' a text that cannot be ignored" (Byerman 368), but the narrator's first response was to change his emotions and focus them elsewhere. Byerman believes he does this by using a strong art based metaphor and repeating his disbelief. By using this metaphor Byerman states that the narrator has a strong need for proper verbal language, but does not use it to receive the message. The next event that the author hits on is to reiterate and verify the thesis. This occurs when the narrator runs into an old friend of Sonny's. Byerman makes a point of analyzing the motif of darkness and reminding the reader of the narrator's intent to continuously distance himself from the message by distracting himself with visual as well as musical interpretations of the situation. By the narrator doing this, Byerman is able to continue to exemplify how conflict resolution is unattainable for the characters due to the seperation of language and
art.
Next, the reader is made to focus on the parallelism between the story of the narrator's father and uncle and his own life. Byerman uses this as an opportunity to bring to light that the "narrator will not believe what does not occur to his immediate experience or what cannot be contained within his linguistic net". (Byerman 369) Therefore, in the article this is used to bridge the previous events with the concluding scene of the story and show the reader the obvious message that the narrator is misinterpreting. By James Baldwin doing this, Byerman can assume that the story must continue, and it does, leading him to the final scene of the story. Sonny and the narrator are at a bar, and this is where the most complex diversion between language and art occur as explained by Byerman in paragraph 8-9. This scene is what drives Byerman's thesis because the narrator "can make the music fit the patterns he chooses", when the whole point of the music is to make its own "order without language". (Byerman 370)
Byerman comes full circle at his conclusion by restating the thesis in a way that highlights the tensions between the characters and how conflict resolution is impossible because of the two extreme ways that art and language are used throughout the piece. He uses this as a final tool to show how the narrator was never able to decipher the own message because he "lie" to himself in order to tell the "truth".
the meaning.
Byerman begins his analysis by presenting his article in a way that exemplifies the narrator's shortcomings in misinterpreting the message throughout the narration.
For example, the narrator's first interaction with the message came in it's simplest form, when he was reading the newspaper. According to the article, the message was, '"spelled out,' a text that cannot be ignored" (Byerman 368), but the narrator's first response was to change his emotions and focus them elsewhere. Byerman believes he does this by using a strong art based metaphor and repeating his disbelief. By using this metaphor Byerman states that the narrator has a strong need for proper verbal language, but does not use it to receive the message. The next event that the author hits on is to reiterate and verify the thesis. This occurs when the narrator runs into an old friend of Sonny's. Byerman makes a point of analyzing the motif of darkness and reminding the reader of the narrator's intent to continuously distance himself from the message by distracting himself with visual as well as musical interpretations of the situation. By the narrator doing this, Byerman is able to continue to exemplify how conflict resolution is unattainable for the characters due to the seperation of language and
art.
Next, the reader is made to focus on the parallelism between the story of the narrator's father and uncle and his own life. Byerman uses this as an opportunity to bring to light that the "narrator will not believe what does not occur to his immediate experience or what cannot be contained within his linguistic net". (Byerman 369) Therefore, in the article this is used to bridge the previous events with the concluding scene of the story and show the reader the obvious message that the narrator is misinterpreting. By James Baldwin doing this, Byerman can assume that the story must continue, and it does, leading him to the final scene of the story. Sonny and the narrator are at a bar, and this is where the most complex diversion between language and art occur as explained by Byerman in paragraph 8-9. This scene is what drives Byerman's thesis because the narrator "can make the music fit the patterns he chooses", when the whole point of the music is to make its own "order without language". (Byerman 370)
Byerman comes full circle at his conclusion by restating the thesis in a way that highlights the tensions between the characters and how conflict resolution is impossible because of the two extreme ways that art and language are used throughout the piece. He uses this as a final tool to show how the narrator was never able to decipher the own message because he "lie" to himself in order to tell the "truth".