PDA

View Full Version : "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" - Discussion


maddog
03-01-2005, 08:05 AM
I’ll open the discussion with a few observations:

I first paid attention to Maya Angelou when a big to-do was made over her invitation to read at Clinton’s inauguration in 1993. I had heard of her most famous book, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” but had never read it. In fact, although I knew something vaguely of the story line when I went to purchase it for this reading, I was so ignorant that I didn’t realize it was an actual biography, rather than a fictionalized account based on her life.

What did I know about the story? My understanding was that it was the story of a young girl who had been raped, and who responded to the trauma by refusing to speak for many years. I had understood the book to be an account of her journey back, her recovery: thus, my initial impression of the title, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.” Her journey would represent the recovery of dignity, personhood, and individual expression – literally, finding her voice – out from under the burden or imprisonment that happens to victims of rape.

Of course, it is also the story of an African-American woman, and the entire history of Africans in the United States has been of finding a human voice while in chains.

This book has been the occasion of MY liberation from certain aspects of my own ignorance. A very minor example: reading the book prompted me to look up a little bit more about the author; I didn’t know she was an actor as well as a writer. The MOST eye-opening part of the story for me was simply the kind of life she and her brother lived with Momma, their grandmother. The question of race was everywhere. While I knew or suspected that Whites in the rural South may have had a difficult time viewing Blacks as human beings, it had never occurred to me that Black people might fear that White people were not really the same species as themselves.

I found the sweep of the book both greater and less than I had imagined from what I knew of the plot line. Although Ritie’s rape by her mother’s boyfriend is an important event in her life, the story does not, in my estimation, focus centrally upon that event. I had thought the story was going to be about the retreat into silence, and the process of re-finding her voice, but there is no identified point of recovery or decision by the “caged bird” to resume “singing.” The chapter with Mrs. Flowers identified one important step on the road to recovery, but the story does not focus on Ritie’s emergence into open communication. Rather, the rape incident and Ritie’s response is simply part of a larger imprisonment of race, poverty, culture, violence, death, and sex. In addition, the child did not retreat into silence solely because of the personal trauma of being raped, though that was bad enough; I think she decided to stop saying anything important to people around her because she felt that her testimony had been responsible for her rapist’s murder. What a responsibility for an eight-year-old!

OTOH, the book ends with the birth of Ritie’s son, out-of-wedlock, just after she graduated from high school at 17 or 18. To me, the ending was quite abrupt, and without enough detail or information to place it into a perspective. What does this new mother-son relationship do to aid or complete the reemergence of the writer’s voice? Is it even connected to that process, or had the process already been completed?

I’m also confused by the opening vignette, of forgetting the lines to the song: “What are you looking at me for? I didn’t come to stay . . . .” I can’t place that incident, time-wise, into the narrative, and do not understand its significance, except possibly in a fairly superficial way – this waif has been shoved around from here to there and doesn’t really know where she belongs.

I enjoyed the writing style. I was looking for a passage I had thought when reading it was very well put, but forgot to mark it. Perhaps I’ll find it when I look again. One place I did mark was in the chapter about the confrontation between Ritie and her father’s SO, Dolores. Dolores has stabbed Ritie and Ritie realizes she’s wounded. She says, “The dread of futility has been my lifelong plague.” I don’t know what it is that informs the character and personality of each individual, but Ritie is a fighter, a fighter against futility, a fighter for the experience of life.

Anyway, some thoughts for discussion: What DOES the title signify? What is it about the story of this person’s life that is compelling? How much of our destiny is our own?
#332

viscousmemories
03-01-2005, 04:45 PM
I finished this book yesterday! Probably not an impressive feat to most, but since I haven't read a book cover to cover in a very long time I'm pretty happy about it. I was reading about 10 pages a night for the first couple of weeks (knowing that's all I had to do to finish it within the month) but then my enthusiasm waned mid-month and I didn't read the last half until yesterday.

I had heard of this book too, but I had no idea what it was about. Admittedly if I had known that child-rape was a central theme of the story I might have chosen not to read it, due to having grown up under the shadow of that theme. I let out a deep sigh of relief when Mr. Freeman was caught (and then killed), just happy to be done reading about that chapter of her life.

I agree that the book ended abruptly, but according to the epilogue she wrote four more volumes of autobiography after this one so maybe it's appropriate. I also agree that the rape wasn't central to this story. It seems to me that the reason the caged bird (she: the poor black woman, the rape victim, the ugly and undesirable) sings is because whatever the external constraints, she knows who she is inside. For me, this theme reverberates throughout her story. Her seemingly infinite tolerance for being misjudged and mistreated reflects a profound strength of character and sense of her self. For example, in this excerpt from when she was trying to get a job at the streetcar place:


The miserable little encounter had nothing to do with me, the me of me, any more than it had to do with that silly clerk. The incident was a recurring dream, concocted years before by stupid whites and it eternally came back to haunt us all.



When I read that it reminded me of a scene in the film The Hotel New Hampshire, where Jody Foster's friend tries to console her after her rape by telling her (paraphrasing from memory) that while they might've hurt her, they hadn't touched the her inside of her.

I learned a lot from this book, mostly about the power and influence of racism. The writing was very gripping and beautiful, and there were a number of scenes that had my stomach flipping with grief (her rape) or clenching my teeth with anger (like the scene at the dentist's office where I wished she'd gone back to burn the place to the ground). I'm sure I might have more to say as others weigh in.

livius drusus
03-01-2005, 10:49 PM
Thank you for your great OP, maddog. I only have a few minutes right now, but I'd like to get an initial response down before going.

The MOST eye-opening part of the story for me was simply the kind of life she and her brother lived with Momma, their grandmother. The question of race was everywhere.

I agree very much. Every anecdote is informed by an undercurrent of race. The example which really brought this home for me was when Bailey stays late at the movies and Momma and Marguerite go looking for him. The ominousness of a young black boy being out past curfew, the tension and fear as his family sets out to find him, the neighbor asking if everything is okay and Momma's terse lie in response: it's a vignette of unescapable horror lying just under the surface of everything.

In addition, the child did not retreat into silence solely because of the personal trauma of being raped, though that was bad enough; I think she decided to stop saying anything important to people around her because she felt that her testimony had been responsible for her rapist’s murder. What a responsibility for an eight-year-old!

I thought that was remarkable too. She is so convinced her lie on the stand convicted and ultimately killed him that she thinks it best for the safety of everyone around them that she not speak at all.

I enjoyed the writing style.

As did I. I think Angelou has a really fine turn of phrase, beautiful metaphors and imagery.

Thanks again for getting the discussion going. :thankee:

Petra
03-02-2005, 03:07 AM
Thank you for your great OP, maddog.

Yes, definitely. Thank you. :)

I read this review and opening discussion last night and wanted to comment, but words failed me.

I have not yet read the book, but once borrowed it among an armful of others from the public library. It didn't get read before my borrowing time was well and truly up. Heh, it actually cost me a pretty penny in overdue fees despite not reading it. :blush:

I had heard that Maya Angelou's writing was poetic, and that she could say much with a few well chosen words and phrases.


Your introduction and vm's and liv's subsequent comments ensures that I will withdraw this book again from the library, and actually read it this time.


Thank you. :)

Beth
03-04-2005, 03:32 PM
For some reason, I am having an immensly difficult time composing thoughts about this book. I identified so much with the character, her thoughts, her feelings, even though she gave me the feeling that she had so much more strength than I.

I'll figure out what I want to say, soon and then post it.

The caged bird sings because she has no choice but to. Survival is the song.

maddog
04-01-2005, 08:20 AM
Well, this bird has laid an egg. The caged bird ain't singin'.

#394