In this blog post I intend to expand on a comparison that was just briefly outlined in our discussion yesterday: the comparison of the style of Mumbo Jumbo to the genre of mythology. As I revisited this comparison that I hadn't thought much about at first, I began to flesh out the idea immensely and jot a ton of pertinent points down in my notebook. So, here it is:
First of all, on the most basic level, both Mumbo Jumbo and myths are similar in that they combine known or observed fact and fiction conceived by an author. For example, during the time period covered in Mumbo Jumbo the president was, in fact, William Harding but, it is not exactly fact that he attended the "chitterling switch" mentioned in the novel. In Norse mythology, there is thunder and lightening but whether or not their existence has to do with gods that live in the sky is debatable. Both genres not only use elements of fact and fiction but combine and blur the line between the two as well, almost creating alternate realities that only resemble the real world (the world that the Wallflower order controls in Mumbo Jumbo and a world intermingled with the gods in most mythologies). The factual side of the story provides structure and credibility while the fictional side lends the author an artistic license to bend the truth as they like to accomplish their goal.
The tone of the two cases is also similar. The acknowledgement of some fictionality in the work in both cases inclines the authors to employ a more storyteller-esque tone over a more serious lecturer-esque tone. Of course I am generalizing, but I think the comparison is still valid. Lecturers tend to be more prepared and straightforward whereas storytellers often ramble, not knowing exactly where they are going next. I think the idea of rambling-storyteller fits extremely well with Ishmael Reed's style of narration; at the beginning he seems to start a million different story lines with no goal but by the end he has it all wrapped up nice and neat even if there were some bumps along the way. To me the tone with which Reed's story is told makes me feel like the story is organic, more similar to the oral tradition of myths than a traditional novel. (This is going to be part of another post about music that I am almost finished with.) His tone helps the story gain life or maybe more like a loa, but even if that is taking the comparison too far, it at least keeps the story from going stale.
Their purpose is similar as well. Like myths, the semi-factual story presented by Ishmael Reed is used to explain an actual set of events. Reed takes a couple years of American culture and explicates them using a story. Mythology is primarily used to interpret and elucidate natural or social phenomena that seem otherwise inexplicable. Usually, some type of pantheon of gods is used to explain events that seem supernatural. Reed has the Wallflower Order fill this role. Like the traditional role of gods in myths, the Wallflower Order can easily float about figurative in a world above the heads of the normal people or mingle with the plebes without being called out. The fight amongst themselves like gods and control everything. They try to punish those who don't do their will and, like when gods punish those who don't worship them, the Wallflower order hurts those who don't worship their God. The multiple religious undertones in Mumbo Jumbo, the Atonist, Voodoo practitioners, and the discussion of Egyptian religion, also coincide with the conventional religious preoccupation in mythology.
Two more somewhat related observations:
It is significant that Mumbo Jumbo resembles mythology because the written myths gave a text to the cultures that they represented. They saved culture for thousands of years but also kind of turned the cultures into museum pieces. In Reed's novel, a primary concern is finding a text and whether that compromises the culture.
Second, resembling an established culturally distinct genre like mythology gives Mumbo Jumbo cultural credibility. He creates the mythology for a time that had none and since his book is not purely fiction, like mythology, there is justification to study in a way similar to the way a historian studies a source. Mythology adds to a culture and with it and the historical context, a careful reader can extrapolate unwritten social nuances of a past time by analyzing how the author uses fiction.
