“...both novels [Passing and Quicksand] clearly represent racial identity as unavoidably shaped by the modern political economy of capitalism...wealth equals whiteness for Larsen's protagonists, and her novels expose how this reification of race operates by converting social relations of class into ontological concepts that appear natural and universal. Ultimately, her protagonists' fetishization of wealth and whiteness is motivated by the desire to become like money itself-the greatest fetish of all” (25).
The protagonist he is …show more content…
referring to is Clare, and his argument is supported by the character descriptions of her, which are very much associated with wealth and high sexualized.
Irene fits Dawahare’s argument to a “t”. He later expands on the characters’ desires to gain wealth: “...money is not just a means of an imaginary escape from commodification but also shapes the most fetishistic form of black identity-the passer for white” (32), because, “As a light-skinned mulatta, she [Clare] can opt out of the black working class by passing for white” (Dawahare 34). There are many anecdotes of both Clare and Irene exemplifying passing. Irene is the most extreme case by passing everyday and lying to those around her, most notably her husband. Even Irene, who is not passing, lives a particularly extravagant life as the wife of a Harlem doctor (albeit, he is also black). Irene passes for convenience and small pleasures. When the story begins, she passes in a restaurant in Chicago in order to have a drink and enjoy the atmosphere. She
represents a “Black Bourgeoisie”, as argued by Pamela L. Caughie in “The Best People”: The Making of the Black Bourgeoisie in Writings of the Negro Renaissance”, “ Larsen does not simply dismiss the black bourgeoisie as actors living in a world of make-believe; she dramatizes, as well as ironizes, the making of class distinctions. Not only do the Redfields have a maid, for instance, but the maid wears high heels” (527). In the novel, the characters aren’t just living in the world of capitalism, they’re defining it. They are defining class distinctions themselves. When Irene went to see Clare for the first time, another friend from school, Gertrude, was also in attendance. They discuss their children and what is means for them to be “dark”, “...’One of my boys is dark.’ [Irene said] Gertrude jumped as if she had been shot at. Her eyes goggled. Her mouth flew open. She tried to speak...”Oh? And your husband, is he-is he-er-dark, too?’” (Larsen 26). To be too dark to pass is a misfortune to the characters. Even though Irene resents Clare and Gertrude for believing that to be “dark” was a bad thing, she still wanted to belong. In the story, “dark” immediately invokes a negative connotation. To be dark is to not be able to pass. If you’re not able to pass, you won’t be successful. This idea is realized in the character of Gertrude. Gertrude married a white man, but could not pass for white because their families were from the same time (Larsen 24). Our description of Gertrude is less than pretty, “Gertrude, Irene thought, looked as if her husband might be a butcher. There was left of her youthful prettiness, which had been so much admired in their high-school days, no trace. She had grown broad, fat almost...” (Larsen 25). Clare, Irene, and Gertrude all grew up together, but have been left in very different circumstances by their adulthoods. Clare, who passes beautifully, is the most successful and depicted as the prettiest. Irene can pass, but chooses not to pass all the time. Even though she is successful in her own right, she is always depicted as subordinate to Clare. Finally, Gertrude is described as the least attractive, and doesn’t pass at all. Throughout the novel, the character’s connections to white society defined their success and wealth.