Bigger
Thomas: Guilty or Innocent?
When
it comes to the bare minimum, the case against Bigger Thomas is quite strong. There
is no denying that he did murder not one but two people, although the rape
charges for Mary are faulty. However, the points made by Max are definitely not
invalid, and there are many more that we as readers can make, as we have an
inside knowledge on the events. Personally, I feel conflicted as to whether
Bigger is truly innocent, but I think some compelling arguments can be made. I
would first argue that Bigger was almost entirely forced into this situation by
Jan and Mary. In my opinion, the entire series of events came out of Jan and
Mary’s desire to get the “inside scoop” on “black life.” Every single thing
that Bigger did leading up to the first murder was almost entirely pressured
onto him by the communist couple. Allowing Jan to drive the car? Forced. Eating
dinner with them? Not his choice. He would not have had to suffocate her if she
was not drunk, as he would not have been in her room. You can call the murder a
product of him being at the “wrong place at the wrong time,” but I would argue
against that. The statement “wrong place at the wrong time” conveys the idea
that this event was completely accidental, 100% up to chance. There was no
chance or luck involved in the situation at all, Bigger’s hand was forced, and
he was not able to make the correct choices during the time leading up to the
murder. I can almost guarantee you that Bigger Thomas would not have
ever been in Mary Dalton’s room if he had even an inkling of a choice. However,
I am not trying to argue that Bigger is completely innocent. I feel like the
way that the book is written and the circumstances are trying to convince us
that Bigger has done no wrong, but I find it, at least in some way, difficult
to completely write it off. After all, he did commit a murder, and not just one
but two. Although it had little effect on the lawmen in the book, I really
think the moment that crowns the idea that Bigger is not an innocent man is the
murder of Bessie. Already into the second book, Bigger is free from the grasp
of Jan and Mary, and he is making is own choices. If Mary’s death was an
accident, and if it is possible to write off, I think that a point that we
glaze over all too often is Bessie’s death. It was, in the way that I read it,
not at all an accident. Bigger was in a less pressing situation, in one that
did not require instantaneous responses. In my eyes, one of the few choices
that Bigger did make in the entire book was the one to kill Bessie, and that is
the excerpt that I would use to drive the nail in the coffin of Bigger’s guilt.
All in all, I think that Bigger’s case is one which can’t be simply solved. It
is one that defiles human nature. We, as people, like to make decisions in
situations like this when one party is clearly “wrong” or “evil,” and the other
is a “just” or “good” option, and there is simply no right or wrong, good or
evil in this situation. Therefore, it is an argument which will never fully be
tied up, a page left unturned, a question unanswered.
I also feel your ambivalence towards the issue of whether Bigger is truly innocent or guilty of Mary and Bessie's murders. I would say that my view is that Bigger should be found guilty, but definitely not put to death, rather life in prison with possible parole. Because even though his environment was extremely difficult at the time of Mary's murder, at a fundamental level he still chose to murder her rather than explain the situation to Mrs. Dalton or run away/hide. However, the court should've still taken into account the dire alternatives to silencing Mary and then fact that there was absolutely no intent to murder her. Obviously, in hindsight its easier to point out what Bigger should have done, and he understandably panicked in the moment. But there has to be repercussions for the murder of two innocent women.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to judge how guilty Bigger really is. He really did kill Mary and Bessie, so he should obviously be convicted. Bigger did do something wrong by killing Bessie, because he intended to kill her. I think it's complicated to judge how guilty Bigger is on a scale for what Bigger did to Mary, which is the more crucial of the two charges in the court case. Technically, Bigger was at fault. The sentence was definitely harsh because of the bias against african americans, but, as Omeed said, there needed to be repercussions for two murders.
ReplyDeleteMany credit Max as the voice of Wright. Are you saying we should have a different interpretation than the author? Did Max not argue for his case that his situation leading up to Mary's event was inevitable? I saw Max as using many arguments that Wright did, if you wrote a paper on this topic I'd love to read it.
ReplyDeleteI defintly feel your questioning towards the justice that bigger faces in the novel. I agree that there are many compelling arguments that can be made to show bigger as innocent, but at the same time he did kill 2 people no matter how confusing his situation was. In my native son essay I talked about the underlying effects of Jan and Mary on bigger and how their treatment towards him ends up forcing him into this predicament. I feel I can connect that idea to the question of whether he is innocent of guilty, but it still won't give a complete answer. Wright's choice to make this justification so ambiguous was a good one because it shows the reality in the situation and the hard facts that people have to encounter when dealing with justice. Great post!
ReplyDeleteI think that we can't definitively say whether or not Bigger is truly innocent or guilty because it is such a gray area. It instead seems to be a series of bad decisions/paths that he was forced down by Wright that led to this situation. He didn't mean to kill Mary, but a series of bad choices on both sides led to her death, so although he isn't completely at fault, he still murdered her. Additionally, I agree with how you mention about how we tend to glaze over Bessie's death, which is something I noticed too. He intentionally killed her and for that he is guilty. He is completely at fault for her death, because he could've simply chosen to not kill her.
ReplyDeleteBigger is indeed guilty of rape--of the rape of Bessie Mears--and he's also unambiguously guilty of Bessie's first-degree, premeditated and fully intentional murder. But neither of these crimes would have happened if it weren't for the original crime, and that's where all the ambiguity lies. If we call it an "accident," then it isn't murder (which entails intent, to varying degrees). Wright encourages us to look at all the extenuating circumstances that lead to this accident--it doesn't render Bigger "innocent," but not necessarily guilty, and certainly not guilty of the specific crimes he's being accused of (a ruthless attack on a defenseless woman). That's the tragedy of the novel in a nutshell--the killing is accidental, but this doesn't matter at all because no one is even willing to conceive that such a thing is possible. But the reader is, I think, intended to feel this constant disparity between the actual events in the room and how they are understood by the press, the courts, the police. We know they're wrong, even as we know that this defense will get nowhere.
ReplyDelete