The “Fact oF Blackness” by Frantz Fanon focuses  on racism from a Negro man’s perspective. He speaks about how the Negro man views himself and his native people. Based on the reading  the negro man has no  sense of self worth. It is for this reason he seeks to find validation and  a sense of identity. However, when placed among his own people he is still lost . This is because  they themselves are conformed to the reality of the white man. He believes that the negro contributed to the subjection by trying to fit into the white man’s world . This can be seen as he makes  reference to speaking a language as the art of colonization. With the intention of the reformation of the negro man to a more sophisticated being . He believes by doing so they would be judged not by the color of their skin but for their intellect. However, to be black and speak with perfect diction is still to be black. In addition , marked as special, unique, and surprising. He refers to this as the black skin with a white mask .
To be a negro is to be nothing. Fanon was right when he stated instead of finding the meaning to existence he realized he was just an object (para1).The negro is everything else but a man. He is seen as a toxic ,arrogant, animalistic and a problematic creature. Constantly miss understood in every way.  While on the other hand no one really even tries to understand the negro man. This is because his emotions are never regarded. It seems his sense of purpose is that of a slave and nothing more. No redemption no gratification no liberation. Instead, he is mentally imprisoned by all the hatred, pain and emotional trauma . Which he Inherited from ancestors and the present.
How can this race be liberated when they are still mentally enslaved. Being called a problem , and hated at the sight of their skin . Not seen for your worth but for a race you had no choice choosing. Who would not hate to be a negro. Why wouldn’t you try to be anything else but that. In the Last paragraph of the passage the negro tells lizzie he is guilty (pg 265). He does not know what crime he committed but he takes accountability. This is due to the fear that the negro man has existed under throughout his existence . I too would have taken the blame if I was in his place. It would seem the negro man is like a  stepchild . He constantly seeks to be loved and accepted by everyone around him. Sadly he does not seek love and acceptance in his self.
Which means for the negro man to be free, he has to find himself. The world can not define what they do not know. It is merely an opinion , nothing factual. As humans we create our own destiny. We have the power to change , build and destroy anything we put our minds to. In the famous quote of Bob Marley “emancipate yourself from mental slavery none but ourselves can free our mind.”

Like many authors, Zora writes about herself. As a Black person, she wrote about her own experiences and how she felt being black. In the beginning, she described her town and how it was “exclusively colored” (1). She mentioned how whites passed by her town and saluted her and sometimes they gave her some coins for singing and dancing. In her text she wrote “… and gave me generously of their small silver for doing these things, … the colored people gave me no dimes” (1).  Hence, white people are good in some ways. Not every white person is bad. Also, in her writing, she mentioned the difference between the native whites, the Southerners, and the Northerners. She stated “the native whites rode white horses, …. but the Northerners were something else” (1). In this passage, Zora wants to show the world especially whites that they came from the same race but still they are different from each other trying to remind them that it is okay to be different.

Her writing shows a lot of bravery. First, she stated, “BUT I AM NOT tragically colored” (1). Hence, she is telling everyone (the whites) that they could never hurt her because she was black. She is not like those who keep looking back and crying because of the oppression and slavery that their ancestors suffered from in the past. And that instead of feeling weak and helpless she is ready to do anything to face the world. Unlike other blacks, who think that slavery is still existing, Zora is telling the world that those days are over. According to Hurston “slavery is sixty years in the past” (2). For Zora, she thinks that her ancestors did what should be done to end slavery and she is not ready to go through that again instead she is always ready to face anything that could come up “I am too busy sharpening my oyster knife” (1). Another proof of her bravery is when she wrote “the position of my white neighbor is much more difficult. No brown Spector pulls up a chair beside me ….the game of keeping what one has is never so exciting as the game of getting” (2). This is a strong message to those who are in power who feel threatened all the time even while eating and sleeping. Hurston is saying that she has nothing to lose unlike politicians and rich whites who are afraid of losing their privileges in case blacks become powerful and rule the world.

Like Emerson, Hurston expressed her desire of looking forward and not to stick with the past. She argues “I do not be long to the sobbing school of Negrohood who hold that nature somehow has given them a lowdown dirty deal and whose feelings are all but about it” (1). Hurston does not want to remember the sad events because it will hold her back and prevent her from enjoying her life. Also, she stated “I belong to no race nor time. I am the eternal feminine with its string of beads” (2). Hence, she also got the transparent eyeball that Emerson wrote about. Through this eyeball, she could see only the positive things which allow her to live and enjoy her feminism.

“On Whiteness and The Racial Imaginary” by Claudia Rankine offers valuable perspective on whiteness in writing and it’s persistence in the literary institution. Rankine brings to light whiteness and its interaction with race. While doing this, she breaks down the person of color’s experience in an white institution, and what that means for them as writers and creators.

Rankine beings by giving examples of tropes one might encounter when approaching white writers writing about race. All of these tropes are racist and ignorant in some way, and exude whiteness and privilege. Although these writers may be heartfelt and well-meaning, their way of thinking is harmful to themselves and those in reach of them, i.e. those who read their work on race. The high frequency of white writers like this adds to the alarm. The white writer’s defense of their writing is overwhelmingly narrow-minded. Their argument for writing on race and other perspectives is that imagination is a “free space” and creativity is transcendental, meaning race, social class, gender, etc are concepts that anyone can tackle because we are above them all. They believe they have the right “to imagine from the point of view of anyone I want—it is against the nature of art itself to place limits on who or what I can imagine” meaning their occupation as writers makes it so they can write about anything. Rankine provides the following argument: race is inherently a part of the imagination because our imagination is an extension of the self, which is undoubtedly attached to and affected by our experience with race. Therefore, when writers make the argument that the imaginary is not affected by race, they are wrong. She says this is not to say writers cannot write about race and from the perspectives of another, it is to ask them why they would want to inhabit that space and “what for… if and how.” Rankine also wants to ask white writers, what is the purpose of using other perspectives? What can you say now that you are using this perspective, and why would you want that idea out in the world, coming from that certain perspective? When white writers talk about the transcendence of the imaginary, they go looking outwards, to other races and lives. They do not look at themselves and their power over their imaginary and lived experiences. White writers writing on race who frequent other bodies and experiences should ask themselves why they write from such a position. If they think they have nothing interesting to add on the topic of race as a white person, they should look within themselves and get to know the bigger ideas and understandings that exist within them.

Rankine also provides insight on the way literary institutions remain in favor of a whitewashed system. They do this by asking for specific content on race from their writers of color, stifling their true perspectives and lived realities by creating a space and system that only accepts certain narratives and discussions. This kind of expectation can be hard for any writer to achieve. Not to mention the conflict and turmoil the writers must be facing about genuine voice vs. work demands. Literary communities also continue to value white writers’ feelings over the valid opinions and questions of readers of color. When people of color bring up a point in white writers’ work, the writers get offended and feel targeted, feeling that this person of color is coming from a political perspective aiming to attack them for being white. After all, despite what point is brought up against the white writers, their intentions weren’t to be offensive in any way, and thus the community rallies to support the writer. As a result, nothing worth talking about is confronted, in this case: whiteness.

This eventually leads to Rankine’s final point and goal: we have to untangle the idea of the racial imaginary that exists in all of us. Some of us have to do more work than others, but all pf us have existed up til now as consumers of a white narrative, and therefore our imagination has also been been affected. Noticing our biases and intentions is not enough, we have to work against the white narrative by following the true creativity inside of us. Ideas and concepts we might not understand but exist within us can mean something profound in someone else, or to the future world. Rankine wants us to write our truth, and to teach something. We cannot connect to everyone at once, so the goal of a universal piece is unachievable, but we can write to teach.

This text is beautifully written and only a tiny bit confusing. Rankine surely has a way with words; a topic like this would’ve been difficult to understand had it been written with an academic style, but her almost poetic, almost spiritual explanations and questions made me enjoy my time here. While reading this piece, I thought to myself many things. For one, just because you can write about something doesn’t mean you should. Another one: intent is not an excuse that can protect you, because by the time you discover the impact of your words, your audience who’ve read and digested your work have been guided to believe a certain idea that might harm themselves and/or someone else. At the end of the text I found myself reading the comments at the bottom, and the most popular one by Claudio Ferrara made me think, what would Rankine say? It’s true we wouldn’t have as many profound pieces of works if past writers had stuck to their lanes and written about themselves. Like Rankine said, our standard of good writing shouldn’t be based on the universal, it should be to teach. The pieces listed in Ferrara’s comment do that. Rankine emphasizes why white writers write from the perspective of another, why they use the racial imaginary to create. They can create without borrowing other races, genders, etc. I think Ferrara missed the point and felt called out.