Comparing Playing dark by Toni Morrison and Art mind by Bell Hooks

Playing in the Dark & Art on my Mind

Toni Morrison's Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination and Bell Hooks' Art on My Mind: Visual Politics are both works of nonfiction that center on the idea of cultural identity and its politics related to art and literature. Hooks is, of course, a forerunner in the critique of African-American culture and Art on My Mind closely examines the world of creating art in an environment that is overly concerned with politics having to do with identity. Hooks has long been known as a writer that is deeply interested in what is happening with the black community and what struggles that community faces. She examines in her book how art can be something that is empowering for the black community, however, she is discouraged by the lack of interest by critics to non-white art. Morrison, likewise, wants to empower the black community, which is precisely what she aspires to do in her book Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination by bringing attention to the misrepresentation of African-Americans or complete ignoring of them in literature. Morrison puts for the importance of the presence of the African community into such terms pushing her point by saying, "the very manner by which American literature distinguishes itself as a coherent entity exists because of this unsettled and unsettling population" (Morrison 6). This statement is in reference to her belief that there is a non-white creation in literature that supports white views while at the same times oppressing non-whites. This is done because of a lack of different views being expressed among critics.

Like Hooks in Art on My Mind, Morrison's objective in Playing in the Dark is to encourage individuals to pay closer attention to what one is experiencing in art, in general. Morrison also claims that one cannot really trust the criticism that has been written before although she also seems careful to imply that art can never be understood definitely in terms of criticism because no piece of artwork -- whether written or painted, etc. -- can ever be totally understood because of individual differences and life experiences. Hooks implies that art can never be fully understood either, but perhaps for different reasons, noting that at a time in history where there is so much "sophisticated cultural criticism by hip intellectuals from diverse locations" extolling "a vision of cultural hybridity…the vast majority of folks in this society still believe in a notion of identity that is rooted in a sense of essential traits and characteristics that are fixed and static" (Hooks). This is why one needs to take a closer look at the individual experience and stop paying attention to the old, static ways of thinking. There needs to be a new representation that is found and new ways of thinking need to be encouraged. This seems to be the message of both writers in each of their books, respectively.

Both Hooks and Morrison allude to the misrepresentation of the black experience in art -- if not the total lack of it. This holds especially true for the representation of black women. Hooks alludes to the injustice of the whole system while Morrison does more than allude to it. Morrison believes that both American writers and critics have gone to great lengths to create this non-white character whose sole function is to support white culture and disregard this other, erroneous creation of the non-white character. By delving into works from the past, Morrison claims that there can be an evidence found as to why this has occurred and then is when we can start with the undoing. Of course, Morrison's claims are not just about African-Americans but they involve all non-whites including Africans and African-Americans (Morrison 8).

Morrison uses examples from literature such as Willa Cather's work, Sapphira and the Slave Girl, to show how there is a "Africanist" absence in American literature. This book, she notes, was completely ignored because of the topic that it set forth: relationships between white people and black people. If there had been interest in this topic by critics, there would have been information to have been garnered, as one can see that Morrison is able to talk about the issues within this book precisely because she cares and it interests her. In other works like Gertrude Steins' Three Lives, the role of the black character has been completely ignored in criticism. Morrison, as a black woman and scholar, can bring a fresh perspective to these oft-ignored characters in literature.

Hooks not only points to the lack of attention paid to non-white characters in art, but she also points to the lack of non-white critics. Morrison brings a fresh perspective to the table because she is of the community where she sees a lack of criticism. While Hooks notes that art can and should be empowering for African-Americans, African-American (or non-white, in general) art doesn't have to be stuck within narrow confines. That is to say that African-American art doesn't have to be all about protest. Hooks is pushing for art to be individualistic and it should be representative of the individuals who create it -- nothing more, nothing less. Hooks seems intent on bringing the reader into a "process of cultural transformation that will ultimately create a revolution in vision" (Hooks xvi).