How is Mumbo Jumbo different from typical detective fiction?
An interesting topic of discussion
surrounding Mumbo Jumbo is the significance of Reed’s divergence from typical detective novels. Though the structure can be seen as
generally conventional, with Papa Labas serving as a detective and the text
serving as the main mystery of the novel, there isn’t much else in Mumbo
Jumbo that truly adheres to conventional detective fiction. I personally
think that Reed was just as intentional in diverging from the genre of detective
fiction as it is accepted in Western culture as he was in diverging from
Eurocentric culture within the actual content of his novel.
One way that Reed defies the
structure of a detective novel is that the detective in his story, Papa Labas,
does not use pure evidence and reason throughout his journey. Papa Labas
definitely relies on religion throughout the whole novel. Additionally, when he
reaches the end of his quest and finally catches HVV and Hubert Safecracker
Gould, he doesn’t use concrete evidence to arrest them. Instead, he tells a
story that is filled with spiritual/supernatural elements, and in the end, HVV
and Safecracker are arrested for an entirely different crime regarding the children.
In this way, Reed doesn’t give proper closure to the conflict, as detective
novels are expected to do. By refusing to provide this closure through concrete
evidence and reason, Reed seems to be commenting on Western culture’s reliance
on ratiocination. Throughout the entire novel, Reed questions Western culture’s
assurance of being superior and of having the most accurate record of
historical events, however, time and time again, Reed puts readers in a
position that makes them question why the version of history told by Western culture
is more acceptable than the version told by African culture. Reed continues
this criticism even in the way that he chooses to not give proper closure to
the conflict in the novel.
Another way Reed diverges from typical
mystery novels is that he reveals the culprit from the beginning. While in most
detective novels the detective is trying to find out who committed the crime
and how they did it, readers are told from the beginning that HVV was the one
that killed Abdul and that it was because he wouldn’t hand over the text. Instead
of focusing on the who and why, Reed focuses on the how of making things
better. Additionally, there is a greater conflict within Reed’s detective novel
that goes beyond just the murder. The biggest conflict is between Atonism and
Jes Grew, which is why the murder is not necessarily the focal point of the
novel.
What do you guys think? Do you think Reed was intentional in diverging from the genre of detective mystery as a whole?
Reading Mumbo Jumbo has been such a thoroughly wacky experience that at first I couldn't even tell that this was a detective novel! I think part of Reed's artistic genius lies in how he confuses the assumed relationships between reader, author, and text. We have additional information that 70's Reed could never imagine, but he is similarly armed with a host of real and fabricated sources from a range of disciplines. Additionally, Reed doesn't hesitate to remind us of his authorial presence through direct notes sprinkled through narration. Mumbo Jumbo isn't the novel we expected to read, though Reed's metafictive explorations challenge us to consider what the text itself means.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was reading Mumbo Jumbo, I had no idea it was a detective novel. Now that I think about it, it sort of makes sense, but the fact that I couldn't tell points to how Reed was diverging from the genre of detective mystery. I really like what Reed was doing, though it was a hard novel to read. I think Reed was very intentional in how he wrote his novel. He challenged white superiority in every way possible, and making his novel a detective novel that doesn't follow the norm is another challenge.
ReplyDelete