4 Reasons Zora Neale Hurston would hate "The Help"

4 Reasons Zora Neale Hurston would hate The Help

Zora Neale Hurston was known as the revolutionary writer of her century; unlike most African Americans, Zora Neale Hurston was all for the segregation of the two races, an idea that was well translated into her controversial writing. The Help by Kathryn Stockett follows the story of multiple female African American Nannies, and an awkward white female who takes on the task of interviewing them for a book. Zora Neale Hurston would despise this novel, despising the “mules “depicted in this wonderful piece of Historical Fiction.  

1-Aibileen and the Silent Treatment

            As Stockett’s novel first opens, the audience is introduced to Aibileen, an older Nanny who has worked with many white families. Over the years, Aibileen has grown a reputation for caring well for the white-folk, never raising voice against those to which she is working for. Even after the death of her son, Treelore, Aibileen worked mighty hard to grow bitter, keeping her mouth shut in unfair situations. Aibileen isn’t the only one of the Help to act this way either. Most Nannies and African American servants depicted in this book put on quite a nice façade for their Caucasian employers, never speaking up about the injustice they face. The only time they express these feelings is in private, and only to those who are also oppressed. On page 128 of Kathryn Stockett’s The Help, Aibileen states to her friend Minny (another nanny) about these injustices, and how she cannot speak to a white woman about them.

        “‘I ask her, What if we told the truth? How we too scared to ask for minimum wage. How nobody gets paid they Social Security. How it feel when your own boss be calling you…’ Aibileen shakes her head. I’m glad she doesn’t say it.” 

            Zora Neale Hurston once stated, "If you are silent about your pain, they'll kill you and say you enjoyed it." Hurston, an advocate for African American pride, would be disappointed in the characters of this book for not sticking up not only for themselves, but their culture.

 

 2-Lack of "Racist" Dialect

          In Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Are Watching God, it is clear to any reader the influence of her interpretation of the African American dialect. Hurston mimics the deep southern slang of the culture, debatably making her writing "racist" and hard to understand. Stockett uses some dialect of the culture, but tones it back in order to make her story better understood. Compare quotes from the two sources:

          Their Eyes Were Watching God: "Love is lak de sea. It’s uh movin’ thing, but still and all, it takes its shape from de shore it meets, and it’s different with every shore."

          The Help: "...and that's when I get to wondering, what would happen if I told her she something good, ever day?"

 

3-Welcome to Eatonville

         In Hurston's bestseller, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Hurston tells of a town called Eatonville, a fictional place based on the factual communities of all African Americans that popped up all around the U.S. around that time period. Stockett tells about such communities, focusing on the places where Minny, Aibileen and Constantine live. Hurston was a massive advocate for such communities, believing firmly that "separate but equal" was accurate and necessary. Zora Neale Hurston would hate the way Stockett compares the white and African American communities.

• When talking about Miss Celia's house, Stockett describes it as a Southerners paradise. A massive white pristine mansion that anyone would be lucky to live in.

• When talking about Constantine's home, Stockett describes the village as dingy, dirty, and very poor. 

Hurston would have hated the comparison of the two 'life-styles', no matter how accurate. She was proud of her people and how they got to where they were. All she wanted was them to get to where the rest of the world was, without the help of the white people.

 

4-The Benefit

         While we never actually see the benefit take place in the novel, but throughout the first 100 pages of Stockett's The Help we see the employers of the help, rich stay-at-home white women, convince the help to bake and participate the annual benefit. While it is unclear as to whether or not the help was getting paid extra for their services, Zora Neale Hurston would disapprove of the generous behavior enacted by the African American nannies. As stated previously, Hurston believed that the two races should remain separate, equal but separate. She would hate the fact that the help would willing participate in an event that included the very people who discriminated against them.

 All in all, it is quite obvious to every reader that Zora Neale Hurston would not enjoy this wonderful piece of Historical Fiction. Despite being from the same personal background as many of Stockett's characters, Hurston's minority opinion simply wouldn't jive with the majority of themes and ideas presented in The Help. Hurston would take one look at Stockett's book and put herself to work, responding in the usual Zora fashion of "simply stating the facts". 

Vincent Cevasco
Coates Bell:7
Best Sellers 

Blog Post # 5

     In my opinion a book has to be about 80-90% true to be considered non-fiction. Just as Laila Lalima  and Seth Greenland stated, we only remember so much of our lives. Some details such as conversations, time, placement, and details that DO NOT ALTER THE OVERALL TRUE PLOTLINE are allowed. Those aren't necessarily lies, just the author's proof of them struggling to remember all the facts. When authors add events that didn't happen or change the way a story ends/begins, they lose all right to call their work a memoir, much less a piece of non-fiction. Any falsified piece of information that can change the overall result of the story or how the readers are supposed to feel about the character or situations should not be allowed within a non-fiction novel. However, as stated before, authors have free reign over specific interactions and the DIALOGUE that took place.


     Half truths are okay... as long as you are writing a piece of fiction or recognize those half truths of having fictional elements. The audience (who invested good money for the book) should have a right to know what they are reading and how much of it is truth. Not only does this ensure the authors audience (those who know its fiction with either abandon that author or continue reading his/her works depending on preference), but it also develops the character of the author. Seth Greenland had a lot of negativity towards James Fry, the author who lied in his book, A Million Little Pieces. If every author puts a little bit of themselves into every novel they write, what does that say about the author if they lie in outrageous ways. Certainly not good for business and puts the author in a negative public eye.


     Books should be labeled. David Shields was wrong in his plea to abolish book labeling. Without labels, how can we as a public know what is real and fake. How can we as readers trust what authors release? Once books loose genre labels, so will all works of literature. State bills and laws will come into question, confessions at court cases, medical notices and all forms of writing. Why question reality when we live in a world where we can pin at least one thing down. If we can't discern what genre a book is, what can we discern?