Pauline and Cholly Breedlove both impose a lot of damage on their daughter, Pecola Breedlove. Pauline and Cholly both have troubling pasts of their own which has made them the way they are, and has affected their relationship with their daughter. Pauline has done less damage to Pecola than Cholly, but has still damaged her nonetheless.

Pauline has imposed damage with less devasting effects than her husband Cholly on their daughter Pecola throughout their lives. One reason why Pauline even hurts her daughter in the first place is due to her own insecurities. The main insecurity that Pauline deals with is her abnormal foot. Pauline feels she does not fit in with normal people due to her foot. She is even more discouraged by seeing how everyone that is “normal” has two regular feet. The city women that exist within Lorain, Ohio only make matters worse for Pauline by providing her with an environment in which she feels separated from. Fuel that adds to the fire of her own insecurity is her love of films. Pauline loves to watch films with white actors that portray a false sense of beauty. A disheartening fact that comes from this false sense of beauty that is portrayed by these actors is that “whiteness” is almost seen as a requirement for being beautiful. More fuel that adds to the fire of insecurity for Pauline has to do with her work. She works as a cleaning lady in a white household. The cleanliness and white people she sees and interacts with within the household also influence her. The sight of them only continue to dishearten her and add to her false belief of beauty coming from whiteness. Both her work in the white household and the ideas portrayed by the films she watches only continue to push her farther away from her family and loving them, especially Pecola.

Pauline has almost no love for her family, which is unfortunate for her children as they do not get to enjoy the benefits of growing up in a loving family or household. Pauline’s poor relationship with Cholly only makes this worse. Although Cholly is mostly to blame, Pauline also plays a role in igniting the conflicting spark between them. Pauline almost accepts and motivates the fights between her and Cholly as she sees herself being more powerful and having more authority than usual. “In these violent breaks in routine that were themselves routine, she could display the style and imagination of what she believed to be her own true self” (Morrison 41). Cholly has had a traumatizing past of his own which includes being abandoned by his father, the loss of his aunt, and being abused by others. All of the anger that exists within Cholly is unfortunately released in the form of rage and fighting upon his family, a major percentage of this being received by Pauline. This only shrinks Pauline’s self esteem and further pushes herself into her own self isolation.

Pauline and Cholly both have demons of their own. They come from the conflict that existed in their past and has shaped them into the people they are. The toxicity that they both possess is unfortunately released upon their children, who never get the luxury of growing up within a loving and safe environment. All of this pressure falls upon Pecola and also shapes her into the person she becomes.

As humans, we tend to keep our most valuable items closest to us as they are worth more to us than any other items. The worth of these items is not measured in monetary value, but in the value of happiness it may bring us or even in sentimental or cultural value. In this sense, some possessions can even be considered priceless to certain individuals. The value of possessions is specifically highlighted in Chapter 13 of “Invisible Man,” which was written by Ralph Ellison.

In the scene where the couple are getting evicted, the narrator initially comes across the possessions and relates them to “junk” as he almost falls over them. “It was piled in a jumble along the walk and over the curb into the street, like a lot of junk waiting to be hauled away” (206). As the narrator starts to observe his surroundings and grasp the situation that is currently taking place around him, he starts to analyze the possessions of the couple. “And I realized that what I’d taken for junk was actually worn household furnishings” (207). It is in the narrator’s analysis that the true value of the items is revealed.

The first item the narrator encounter is the picture frame which holds the dreary image of the couple when they were young. From the narrator’s analysis, we know about the particular expression of “stiff dignity” present on their faces. The invisible man relates to this as he mentions how it brings back memories for him. “Feeling strange memories awakening that began an echoing in my head like that of a hysterical voice stuttering in a dark street” (209). The sad expressions on the faces of the couple may relate to the narrator as they may remind him of feelings of oppression and general sadness he may have felt before.

Other items the invisible man comes across include bones used to play music, various hair products and a range of images and photos. The narrator analyzes these items in the same way he analyzed the picture frame and its contents. He goes on to realize that they share the same culture. This may relate to why unpleasant memories flooded back to the narrator when he was analyzing the picture frame.

The invisible man’s speech also plays a role in explaining the value of the couple’s possessions. Once the invisible man realizes that he shares the same culture as the couple, he treats the possessions as an extension of his culture and slowly becomes enraged whilst giving his speech after seeing how the possessions were treated. This may have reminded the narrator of how African American culture was being mistreated as well.

The narrator sees the mistreatment of the possessions as a contribution to the mistreatment of African American culture which was present at the time, and which is still unfortunately present today. He relates to the couple as not only getting mistreated by others, but also as sharing the experience of an African American living in the United States during that time.

The perspective of writers is discussed in “On Whiteness and The Racial Imaginary” by Claudia Rankine and Beth Loffreda. They specifically discuss the issue of race and the obstacles an author faces when writing. Authors are often challenged when attempting to write from the perspective of another person. One of the main challenges they face is trying to write about the experiences a person of a different race has had or struggles they went through. It is mentioned in the essay how this is not possible because a person can only feel or go through the experiences of their own race. By discussing how an author has a limited imagination due to not being able to appropriately create a character that is a different race, the authors of this essay highlight how authors are not entitled to write about anything.

The essay demonstrates how an author’s perspective may be restricted if they are a different race. It is important to look out for this because it can make the text unreliable as the author is presenting inaccurate information or something they are not fully educated on. The presence of this restricted perspective can be detected by the reader by looking for sympathy in the writing. When an author attempts to write about another race, often they hold back in their writing because of their lack of knowledge and experience. Most of the time, this held back writing can be translated as sympathy towards the other race. At the same time, it can be difficult for authors to write about situations that involve characters of the same race as the author. Additionally, they might hesitate on the subject out of fear that they will be inaccurate or offend the race they are discussing in some way. These authors will usually lack the emotion or be able to develop the appropriate feelings the character of the different race is feeling because they themselves have never been in the situation and cannot properly imagine it. This restrictive writing only gives readers the wrong idea and does the opposite of the author’s intentions.

Worries and feelings of concern might flood the minds of people of color who read material written by authors of different races because they know that misinformation may be present. This misinformation might even include or be fueled by racism. Authors of other races may be angered by the accusations of misinformation or even racism present in their writing by their readers. While this may not be intentional, it can be present due to the absence of information the authors have. Some entitled authors might believe that their imaginings are without fault and will unfortunately become irritated if told otherwise. Some authors may be offended or hurt when a reader of color or another race points out the misinformation that exists within the authors writing. The offense that these authors feel tends to be blamed upon the readers of the material even though they are just mentioning the truths. However, the hurt that occupies the authors comes from the privilege of the author’s perspective and race. These authors are unable to acknowledge the advantaged position that they are in when they write. It is because of this that the issue of race can not be evaded in writing.

Emerson mentions how the landscape is viewable by all men. However, he does specify that the poet owns the landscape. The landscape is owned by the poet because only the poet can properly do the landscape justice and reveal its deepest truths in a way that respects nature. He is able to respect nature by providing an honest and unfiltered perspective. Emerson says that only the poet can “integrate all the parts” of the landscape. This demonstrates his belief that poets have the power to implement the big picture while also all of the small details within their writing, whereas other owners might only see one side to the property. For example, a farm owner might only appreciate the produce his/her property provides him/her, while the poet, paying attention to all parts of the landscape, can figuratively show his/her gratitude of everything the landscape offers through their writing. In addition, Emerson mentions how the landscape is separated into different parts to show the significance of each section. The farm and fields provide food while the woodland’s creatures maintain a balance in nature. By doing this Emerson is able to emphasize how these different components need to come together to thrive as one setting: the landscape. This connects to the poet and his/her purpose in creating a flow that illustrates each part and its beauty while at the same time, portraying the entire system as a whole.

While property can physically be owned by a person with a contract binding relationship, the landscape belongs to the poet in a metaphorical way so as that the poet can cherish the landscape as any other owner would cherish their property. Another difference in the ownership relationship between the landscape and the poet is that the poet does not truly the own the area, meaning they have no obligations toward it. Their sole responsibility is to depict it so that others can see its purpose and virtues. Like nature, the landscape cannot be owned by man. Its fields can be watered and its soil dug but it cannot be owned as it is its own owner. So, the poet can own the landscape in the sense that they know how it should be seen in the public eye by describing it in their work in the rawest and purest way. The poet can never physically own it, because the landscape already belongs to nature.