Their Eyes Were Watching God: An Empowering Love Story? Perhaps Not

During class as we discussed Their Eyes Were Watching God for the final time, we talked about how it can be viewed as a love story or a story of Janie’s empowerment as a woman. I believe that looking at those two interpretations as mutually exclusive is wrong, likely brought on by an assumption that love stories must inherently be simple and meaningless. However, just because a love story can be about individual empowerment does not mean that Their Eyes Were Watching God is both of those things. Their Eyes Were Watching God is a love story but certainly not a novel about Janie’s empowerment. 

What does it mean for Their Eyes Were Watching God to be a love story? It simply means that the plot revolves around love. It revolves are Janie’s relationships with various men and how she feels about them. Obviously, the novel is more complex than the image that I get in my head of the classic romance novel, straying very far from the formula of the genre. But I’m not claiming that Their Eyes Were Watching God should be compared to some trashy romance novel or even Jane Austen, I’m merely making the clearly true statement that Their Eyes Were Watching God is centered around Janie’s romances, thus making it, by definition, a love story.  Many may claim that love stories are all meaningless and unserious (cough cough Richard Wright cough cough), but Their Eyes Were Watching God is proof of the contrary. One can have a love story that is complex, but that does not necessarily mean that its complexity lies in a character’s independence.

Any claim that Their Eyes Were Watching God is about Janie’s empowerment is a bit confusing to me. If the novel were to end without the inclusion of Tea Cake, focusing instead just on Janie’s relationships with Logan and Joe then it would certainly be easier to define the novel as empowering. After all, Janie is growing separately from them, in direct opposition of the boundaries that they intend to push upon her. However, with Tea Cake, Janie goes along with everything he says, she “aims tuh partake wid everything” (124). Janie makes the initial decision to follow Tea Cake, but from that point, Janie lacks any semblance of agency. Her life course is absolutely decided by Tea Cake and his choices. Perhaps she could have had more control had she chosen to take it and merely did not want to (though reading the scene about Tea Cake beating Janie as she took it willingly makes it hard to believe that), but from what we are shown, Janie ceases to exist as an individual past this declaration that she will follow Tea Cake. Even in the final moments of the novel, as Janie is left alone after Tea Cake has passed away, she imagines Tea Cake being with her. Sure, Janie learns from her time with Tea Cake, she has new experiences and is able to see the broadness of the world. But she learns all these things in the context of Tea Cake’s direction, she is not becoming empowered as an individual. 

Even within the context of the frame narrative, Pheoby, hearing the same story as the reader, comes to the conclusion that Janie lived a full life, but through the context of a man’s direction. After hearing about Janie’s experiences with Tea Cake she says, “Ah ain’t satisfied wid mahself no mo’. Ah means tuh make Sam take me fishin’ wid him after this” (192). Why shouldn’t Pheoby take Sam fishing? Or why couldn’t she go by herself? The answer lies in the fact that Janie’s story, while about her having new experiences and seeing the wonders of the world, is absolutely dependent on the men in her life. Janie does not take the lead, she does not act on her own. Pheoby will not do that either. Their Eyes Were Watching God is not about Janie’s individual empowerment.


Comments

  1. SerenityNovember 29, 2021 at 8:52 AM

    I understand where you're coming from here, but I think it's also important to look at the story through its historical context. In 1937 a woman who refused to marry would be brutally scorned, I mean she already was scorned for being with a man younger and poorer than her. She chose Teacake because he made her happy and at the time that was radical. It was also quite different from her other relationships because she was the one with the money. Just because someone conforms to typical gender stereotypes doesn't mean they aren't empowered if that's what makes them happy. Also, I think assuming that because she's with Teacake she isn't empowered gives too much power to men :) I think this book isn't necessarily about empowerment, but to say she isn't empowered feels very second-wave feminism to me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. SAhmad DastNovember 30, 2021 at 9:34 PM

    Personally I always found the idea of Their Eyes Were Watching God being entirely an empowerment novel kind of strange. Of course there are elements of empowerment in the novel, but towards the end of the novel, her relationship with Tea Cake almost seems to indicate that her love for him overpowers all the strength she has gained through her life so far. She does not say anything when he strikes her nor does do anything. Her love for him seems to blind her and prevent her from taking action. However, it would be unfair to not acknowledge the development she undergoes. She goes from a woman who is completely submissive to her husband and is psychologically broken under him to a much more independent woman with a much stronger spirit. This book is not quite a full love story nor is it entirely an empowerment story either. It is in limbo, somewhere between those two categories.

    ReplyDelete
  3. SallyDecember 2, 2021 at 6:50 AM

    I understand your argument. I thought of it a bit differently, seeing Tea Cake as just another relationship that would shape who she was. There was the extreme side of her with no power (with Logan and Joe and she desperately wanted that power) and the side of her with just a little more power and a lot more given control (from Tea Cake that she just decided not to take). If she was completely blinded by her love for Tea Cake, she would not have taken the gun and killed him. Killing him, the one relationship she was actually happy in, shows growth to me. At the end of the novel, she's mostly content (despite not being in a relationship), and I see that as empowerment because the one thing she originally wanted was a "perfect" relationship.

    ReplyDelete
  4. MariamDecember 2, 2021 at 8:48 PM

    This is a great post! You've clearly stated your stance of whether or not you believe Their Eyes Were Watching God is an empowering story, and have provided compelling evidence to support your claim. I would say that I'm in somewhere in the middle of this argument. On one hand, I was extremely disappointed that Janie did not leave Tea Cake after he began hitting her. However, on the other hand, the novel does end with Janie saving her own life by killing Tea Cake. Maybe the author left the novel open ended to allow the readers to visualize their own future for her-- one where she's a trailblazing feminist who doesn't take any mistreatment from men? That's what I'd like to believe anyways. Overall, great job!

    ReplyDelete
  5. ZoeyDecember 5, 2021 at 8:15 PM

    I would consider Their Eyes Were Watching God to be a little more empowering than your blog post would make it seem. You make a lot of good points - and I definitely agree that it could have been more empowering. Yet I think Janie does show more agency in her relationship with Tea Cake than in her previous relationships. Sure he makes most of the decisions - but that's just because it's only acceptable for him to do so. For the same reason that it wouldn't be socially appropriate for Pheoby to take Sam fishing. Janie has the money and the power - she could have left the relationship at any moment, something she couldn't have done with Logan or Joe. She does also influence her and Tea Cake's path in a number of places - for example when she tells him she wants to work in the fields with him rather than staying cooped up at home; which he goes along with.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigger Thomas, (Alleged) Rapist Before Murderer

     Bigger Thomas is a rapist and a murderer. The second twice over, but the first only once. These three crimes should be more than enough to convict and sentence him to death, yet, in his prosecution, Buckley chooses instead to focus instead on a heinous act that Bigger did not, in fact, commit, the rape of Mary Dalton. This rape is the very crux of Buckley’s case, exemplified in his statement, “He killed her because he raped her! Mind you, Your Honor, the central crime here is rape ! Every action points toward that!” (413). This approach is permissible in court because Max allows it. Max completely dismisses the idea that Bigger did not rape Mary saying, “Let us not concern ourselves with that part of Bigger Thomas’ confession that says […] he did not rape the girl. It really does not matter” (403). Why does it not matter? Why is Bigger convicted largely on a crime that he did not in fact commit?            The answer comes down to public perception. Bigger himself sums it up bes
Read more

Beloved: Narrative Structure and Sethe’s Iron Wall

Beloved by Toni Morrison has a very interesting narrative structure. The novel circles around its core themes, its mysteries, getting ever closer with each chapter. The question then rises, why did Morrison choose to write like this? An easy answer: it’s simply a unique structure that makes the novel more interesting to read. However, there’s a much more complicated answer that deserves a closer look.   There are two main memories that Morrison hints at slowly throughout part 1 until the full scene is finally revealed; those being the moment in the barn where Sethe’s milk is taken and the moment in the shack where Sethe kills the baby. The narrative structure of both moments is interesting, but here I’ll just focus on the first one as understanding Sethe’s response to the second event is too much for me to cover meaningfully here. The first event is more clear-cut, an intensely traumatic moment for Sethe.   Sethe is an iron wall. From the very beginning of the novel, Paul D associates
Read more

Why is Tod Clifton so Attractive?

       Reading the description of Brother Tod Clifton that the narrator gives on page 363 of Invisible Man is certainly a bit jarring. No other character is described in nearly as much detail, nor as positively. To show just how unusual this description is, here is the narrator’s description of Brother Jack upon first meeting him, “A short insignificant-looking bushy-eyebrowed man with a quiet smile on his face stood beside me, looking not at all like a policemen” (287). That is the whole description. One single sentence that leaves the actual character’s features vague and undefined. Now, here is a section of the description of Brother Clifton, “I saw the broad taut span of his knuckles across the dark grain of the wood, the muscular, sweatered arms, the curving line of the chest rising to the easy pulsing of his throat, to the square, smooth chin, and saw a small X-shaped patch of adhesive upon the subtly blended, velvet-over-stone, granite-over-bone, Afro-Anglo-Saxon contour of his
Read more