Passing

Novel: Passing

Author: Nella Larsen

Analysis&Quote:

This is what Irene Redfield remembered.

This story is about Clare Kendry “passing” in society but it is told through Irene Redfield’s memory. It’s interesting because when I started reading about ten pages into the story, my mind immediately went to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. There is something in the way Larsen writes her sentences, describes scenes, and presents characters that draws strong parallels to me. Take this description of how she describes Chicago:

A brilliant day, hot, with a brutal staring sun pouring down rays that were

like molten rain. A day on which the very outlines of the building shuddered

as if in protest at the heat. Quivering lines sprang up from baked pavements

and wriggled along the shining car-tracks.

In The Great Gatsby Fitzgerald describes Daisy’s living room:

A breeze blew through the room, blew curtains in at one end and out the other 

like pale flags, twisting them up toward the frosted wedding-cake of the ceiling,

and then rippled over the wine-colored rug, making a shadow on it as wind does

on the sea.

They are able to create vivid and strong imagery using only few words. The way they present characters share similar characteristics as well. Larsen describes Clare Kendry:

            There had been, even in those days, nothing sacrificial in Clare Kendry’s

idea of life, no allegiance beyond her own immediate desire. She was selfish, and

            cold, and hard.

Fitzgerland describes Daisy’s husband, Tom Buchannan:

His speaking voice, a gruff husky tenor, added to the impression of fractiousness

 he conveyed. There was a touch of paternal contempt in it, even toward people he liked —

 and there were men at New Haven who had hated his guts.

They describe characters in specific details that, like the imagery, give you a sense of them with only a few words. In general, the way/style they write is very particular. They’re economical with their word choice but simultaneously giving.

I’m drawing these parallels because I feel they are both using a similar approach to writing about sensitive subjects. The Great Gatsby is talking about the wealth of the wealthy, their indulgent lifestyles, and is commenting on society during the 1920’s. Passing is commenting on how society accepts/rejects race, how race intersects with class, and possibly how race is perceived by people of that race. I think it will be an interesting story not only in terms of the actual content, but in how the actual story is written.

What I’ve noticed is how Larsen writes in a way that class surpasses race, or at least in certain instances. From the beginning we don’t know who is black, white, or mixed. Only later after learning about their class do we learn that Clare Kendry is “passing” and that Irene Redfield has chosen not to do this. Irene is in a high class because she is able to buy these gifts for her children, decide between two dresses for a night event, and have a social calendar for all next week filled. Not to mention when she’s about to faint she doesn’t have to worry about how she will pay the taxi or pay for the glasses of tea she’s drinking.

However, Larsen almost hints that Clare Kendry is mixed from the rumors people spread about her:

And then they would all join in asserting that there could be no mistake about

it’s having been Clare, and that such circumstances could mean only one thing.

Working indeed!

I’m not sure if Larsen is suggesting that Clare is of a lower class and that’s why she’s working or if they know she’s partially black and because of that she’s working. If it is the latter, then Larsen slightly suggest class could be tied to race. Yet, overall I find it interesting how Larsen presents the characters class or writes signifiers of the person’s class and then proceeds to mention the race. Larsen could also be saying that the class you are in is affected more by one race than another. For example, it is worse to be a poor black than a poor white.

Another interesting point is how Larsen set the story in Chicago which, if I am remembering correctly, has always been a historically black city. I think Larsen is making another point by making the main character, a mixed woman passing as white, living/visiting a black city. Why is that? Could Larsen be making a statement about the black community at large? Other things I found interesting was the twelve year specificity. Why is twelve such an important number? And how, at least at this moment, there is no distinction between who is right or wrong. Larsen doesn’t seem to imply that Clare Kendry’s “passing” makes her an angel or a saint. She makes it hard, at least in the beginning to root for either character, which almost begs the question: Should we even root for a character? It seems this novels is exploring lots of gray areas to get people thinking, and not to provide a solution to the problems or issues that arise.