In his “Everybody’s Protest Novel,” James Baldwin criticizes the American liberal and reader of American protest novels, writing that the problem with the American Protest novel is that the text itself frames the social issues it claims to address as remote and removed from the reality of the author and the reader. He writes that the only benefit the reader gets from such a text is that “finally [they] can receive a very definite thrill of virtue from the fact that [they] are reading such a book at all” (Baldwin 15).
Reading this last week, I was naturally taken back to the Summer of 2020, when Americans were rapidly disseminating and consuming protest media regarding the fight for racial equity and justice in the United States. Though I do not entirely share all of Baldwin’s criticism of protest novels and protest media in general, I can definitely see how passion for change in a nation that was built upon protest and dissent can be misguided and misdirected in a destructing manner. Although much of the media disseminated in the Summer of 2020 were not novels/fictitious—much of them were notable documentaries, essays, journals, infographics, op-eds and nonfiction books—I would argue that they did the work of coddling the liberal American. These pieces of media, though not created with poor intention, seem to be the easiest pieces of media for a troubled and well-intentioned American to grasp onto. They provide the illusion of protest, without the hassle or promise of activity.
Baldwin specifically detests how the American protest novel, particularly regarding race and racism, often still does the work upholding anti-Blackness and white supremacy; he uses Uncle Tom’s Cabin as an example of a text that was written and published to appeal to the white American liberal. Baldwin argues that the novel takes an outward stance against racism, but really it only sees Black Americans as having potential for redemption through performative whiteness.
I don’t think that the texts and pieces of protest media that were being passed around this past summer did exactly what Baldwin accuses of the American Protest Novel, but I will say that the novelty of protest for many liberal Americans made it so that even antiracist media could be used for white complacency and inadvertent anti-Blackness.
In his “Everybody’s Protest Novel,” James Baldwin criticizes the American liberal and reader of American protest novels, writing that the problem with the American Protest novel is that the text itself frames the social issues it claims to address as remote and removed from the reality of the author and the reader. He writes that the only benefit the reader gets from such a text is that “finally [they] can receive a very definite thrill of virtue from the fact that [they] are reading such a book at all” (Baldwin 15).
Reading this last week, I was naturally taken back to the Summer of 2020, when Americans were rapidly disseminating and consuming protest media regarding the fight for racial equity and justice in the United States. Though I do not entirely share all of Baldwin’s criticism of protest novels and protest media in general, I can definitely see how passion for change in a nation that was built upon protest and dissent can be misguided and misdirected in a destructing manner. Although much of the media disseminated in the Summer of 2020 were not novels/fictitious—much of them were notable documentaries, essays, journals, infographics, op-eds and nonfiction books—I would argue that they did the work of coddling the liberal American. These pieces of media, though not created with poor intention, seem to be the easiest pieces of media for a troubled and well-intentioned American to grasp onto. They provide the illusion of protest, without the hassle or promise of activity.
Baldwin specifically detests how the American protest novel, particularly regarding race and racism, often still does the work upholding anti-Blackness and white supremacy; he uses Uncle Tom’s Cabin as an example of a text that was written and published to appeal to the white American liberal. Baldwin argues that the novel takes an outward stance against racism, but really it only sees Black Americans as having potential for redemption through performative whiteness.
I don’t think that the texts and pieces of protest media that were being passed around this past summer did exactly what Baldwin accuses of the American Protest Novel, but I will say that the novelty of protest for many liberal Americans made it so that even antiracist media could be used for white complacency and inadvertent anti-Blackness.
As you point out, this summer was a summer for the books when it came to the dissemination of texts about racism. We saw the work of Dr. Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo rise in literary circles. While I don’t know if I would consider most of the texts that came out during this summer as protest novels or protest media, I would agree with Baldwin when saying that a lot of what was built for protest was catered towards white liberals. The thing about catering to white liberals is that often nothing gets done after that catering is done. Protest media makes white liberals feel good about “doing the work” which is simply reading a book or watching a movie and not the actual work that needs to be done in the streets. I would agree with Baldwin in saying that catering your protest novel to white liberals doesn’t challenge the system but in a way reinforces it and certain ideas about Blackness. Sometimes, it reinforces the idea that Blackness is tied in with helplessness and that changing whiteness can save Black people from that helplessness by reading a book or watching a movie.