What does Hinckle Von Vampton represent?
Hinckle Von Vampton is by far the most cartoonish and satirical character in this novel, mocked by Reed’s postmodernist irony throughout the book. He is meant to mimic a historical figure named Carl Van Vechten, a white man who promoted and represented black culture during the Harlem Renaissance and also some black stereotypes, which I think is where a lot of satirical imagery comes from here. Von Vampton is depicted as a controlling man who is an indeterminable number of centuries old, having worked with the Wallflower Order for many years to take down forms of Jes Grew and keep Antonists in control (Reed 56). They discover that Jes Grew has emerged in America, particularly in New Orleans, and attempt to destroy it over the course of the book. They create a faulty master plan to begin a newspaper called the Benign Monster to disrupt and eventually overpower Jes Grew.
Most of all, I feel this plotline really plays up the cartoon character aspect of Von Vampton’s story; he might as well be a Disney villain because he is so much more ridiculous than he is scary, reinforcing the idea that he shouldn’t be taken seriously. It reminds me of certain forms of propaganda, like wartime satirical images used as a way to invalidate opposing forces. The irony of this depiction, as black people have often been the subject of many racist propagandas, is another part of the broader picture Reed aims to fulfill. By creating cartoonish depictions of villains, he focuses on the meaning behind forms of black culture Western perspectives might see as “mumbo jumbo.” Through this, he emphasizes the power of black people and the fact that perspective is very important in the way we should see things.
Reed also uses Von Vampton as an ironic resource to show how media outlets like the Benign Monster represent real media platforms that use propaganda. He believes Jes Grew followers “have no control over who speaks for them. It’s in the hands of the press and radio. What we will do is begin a magazine that will attract its followers, featuring the kind of milieu it surrounds itself with (69),” intending to manipulate them away from Jes Grew. His inherent fear and need to control Jes Grew illuminates how propaganda so often relies on oversimplification and stereotypes of culture, the same way Talking Androids are used by Von Vampton. Von Vampton is supposed to be something of an expert on black culture, but visits the cabaret and is quickly humbled by Major Young when he calls the magazine “racist and insulting” (102), showing that this media’s representation of Jes Grew is obviously fake and extremely rude. Reed both depicts Von Vampton as an open resource of propaganda during the book and illuminates the ways propaganda and manipulated media has been used against black people over time.
Works Cited
Reed, Ishmael. Mumbo Jumbo. Scribner, 1972.
Hi Penny! I love your thorough and accurate analysis of Hinckle Von Vampton! I think one thing you could mention here is how propaganda has really been used throughout history to undermine a culture. It's one of the main strategies of Atonists. If Von Vampton's Benign Monster is a present-day example of weaponizing social media, a past example would be Set's attempt to spread rumors against his brother, Osiris, about the illegitimacy of the dance he was teaching.
ReplyDeleteThere's no question that the actual Harlem Renaissance poets and publishers in the novel can see right through Hinckle Von Vampton--none of THEM are calling him the "major figure in Black literature today" or whatever the phrase is. And maybe this reflects how some real Harlem Renaissance artists might have felt about Carl Van Vechten. The butt of the joke here is that the larger "literary world" (read: the white/non-Harlem Renaissance establishment at the time) is all too eager to accept this "negrophile and patron of the arts" as an authentic advocate for the movement, and they don't question his authenticity for a second. As you note, the "real" poets see through him immediately, and they don't hold back in their criticism. One way to read this critique is that Reed is suggesting that the historical real-life Harlem Renaissance was too beholden to wealthy patrons and donors (like Van Vechten) for its success--the people who funded the journals and venues for the art to flourish, which (in Reed's view) might have compromised the purity of the art in some way. The difference is that Van Vechten (as far as we know) was not ACTUALLY working for some secret society and deliberately aiming to undermine the movement--but Reed is saying that these intentions don't matter. The effect might be basically the same.
ReplyDeleteI love this idea of Hinkle Von Vampton being a cartoonish baffoon. I think you're right as well in your interpretation of this satirization being built to undermine him as a white supremacist figure. With that being said, I'd be curious to explore the android as a cartoonish weapon, used as a form of undermining art, because there are some parallels in the toxic appropriation there and the cartoonish evil Von Vampton brings.
ReplyDeleteHi Penny, I definitely agree that Reed uses a great deal of irony when writing Hinkle Von Vampton's character. Your depiction of this reminds me a lot of Doctorow's use of irony in Ragtime, when writing about characters like Father and J.P. Morgan. In both novels, the authors take prideful, confident characters and undermine their authority with irony. Good blog!
ReplyDeleteHi Penny! I really like your descriptions of Hinkle Von Vampton's character, and I definitely agree that he is described with a lot of irony. I think to a certain extent this is to make fun of people like him who are anti whatever "Jes Grew" might be, and I definitely think that it's a successful satire. Great blog!
ReplyDeleteHi Penny! I really enjoyed reading your blog post. I completely agree with you about the Hinkel Von Vampton character. I thought that he was also considered to be the sort of funny character. I think that adding a character like Von Vampton really brings a joke aspect to a serious situation, and I think that comparing him to be like a Disney Villain is very accurate. Good Job!!
ReplyDeleteVon Vampton is such a perfect example of the 2-D characters of this book still serving perfectly as players in the stories purpose. While he's cartoonish villianish, he reflects a historical figure (or multiple throughout time) and real historical trends and ongoing movements, like talking androids and the undermining of the culture.
ReplyDelete