Reckless Eyeballing

 RECKLESS EYEBALLING

Ishmael Reed

In our latest episode of books for bigots, Mr. Reed gives us some interesting things to think about, all of which are directly aimed at bigots.  In that the novel is directed directly at bigots, bigots would find little in it to applaud. Ishmael has much to say and uses a novel to say it which, I might add, can be an effective way of saying something.  Sometimes it is more effective to have a character say it than the author directly although in RECKLESS EYEBALLING it is clearly the author giving us his opinion on various things through the mouth of Mr. Ball, the protagonist. 

The comment that the movies are about monsters of one kind or another that have only one thing on their mind - - white women, is a rather unique intro to the issue of whiteness.  One certainly can't dispute this fact about superheroness.  When it comes to King Kong or superheroes like Superman, Batman, The Green Hornet, etc., black, brown, red, or yellow doesn't cut it - - white women for the large gorilla and those saving human kind from themselves.  The same goes for aliens from outer space.  There must be some idea out there in the universe that white women taste better when roasted or flayed or eaten in some other manner than black, brown, red, or yellow women.

Then you have those who maintain the earth is flat and believe flying too high jeopardizes punching a hole in the sky.  There are such people you know and one simply has to accept the ludicrous when dealing with them.  This, too, is often bigotry in bizarre mode.  Where one can adopt the ridiculous as fact, one usually finds incipient bigotry.  Always keep an eye on the irrational; it can often get out of hand and be dangerous.

By the way, eyeballing is the act of looking too long at one object and reckless eyeballing is a black man looking too long at a white woman.  In the past this has led to unfortunate circumstances for the eyeballer.  We must protect our white women folk at all cost, apparently for superheroes and aliens. In

There also appears to be an underlying irritation of Mr. Reed's in the form of white feminists.  He spends a considerable time in other publications discussing the effects of feminism on the black male with several remarks to the same effect in the novel under discussion.  He doesn't seem to believe that feminism has been very helpful to the black cause and wants this view known.

The other nemesis of black culture and life in the United States, according to Mr. Reed, have been the Jews apparently. One of his comments I find interesting and which will cause further thought is the idea the Jewish community uses the blacks as a buffer between them and the goyim.  After all the Jews are who killed Christ; black people weren't in the picture.  Western civilization has insisted on Jesus being white:  all the pictures I've seen of Jesus throughout my life indicate he is strictly Caucasian. Now that the Jews have someone they can shove in front of the white public, black people,  that gets the attention of the bigots and they are thankful for that or so says Mr. Reed.

  Upon finishing the book, I really didn’t have the impression that this was satire; although there is some reference somewhere that the novel was meant to be a satire and we should consider all or parts of it as such.  Whether the book or parts thereof are meant to be satirical or an accurate picture of American society is an interesting question and one that deserves some thought even if it were to be hotly contested by the Jewish community and bigots in general.  There is discussion by Mr. Reed in another publication that RECKLESS EYEBALLING was indeed intended to be satirical, however it did not impress me as being particularly satirical.

There is one digression early on which is pertinent to this discussion: the person who was to direct the play RECKLESS EYEBALLING,  Jim Minsk, a Jewish guy,  was lured to a fake southern college and murdered in some sort of bizarre Christian ritual. I'm not quite sure how this episode fits into the novel or adds to it other than an example emphasizing the view that Jews need blacks as a buffer between themselves and whites still.

Another totally unrelated topic raised in some random conversation on page 84 of the St. Martin's Press version is the idea that the most frequent object in European art (not recent) is a weapon.  Reed is correct in his view that European art is full of "murder and mayhem".  Between portraits of the aristocracy or the bucolic are the full scale battles or of people being tortured by one method or another.  European art does tend to reflect a serious defect in human nature.  However, it is not clear how these random reflections contribute to the novel other than to reflect poorly on our ancestors.

Reckless Eyeballing is actually about writing and getting staged a play - - a play of the same name as the title of the book.  It doesn't appear to be an easy task and one requiring the assistance of very unpleasant people.  So we do have a plot.  The center of the novel and our playwright is Ian Ball who overcomes all obstacles which consist mostly in the unpleasant people he must deal with to get his play on stage. But in the end all is well as the play is a huge success and we are led to believe that success enables Mr. Ball to accrue large sums of cash allowing him to return to his home island.

But as a last thought, the following:  At page 143 of the edition I read, the author makes an interesting comment through Ian Ball:  "Good grief, Ball thought.  Not only did the black and brown ones hate the white ones, but the yellow ones and each other as well".  Everyone must hate everybody.  Not a situation that holds much promise.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo