Samantha Rhynard- Blog post #7

The works of Ta-Nehisi Coates that we are currently reading discussing have very different tones, and yet discuss very similar topics. One obvious reason for this is that "A Case for Reparations" is a long article, whereas Between the World and Me is a novel. "A Case for Reparations" does its best to incorporate all of the major thematic elements that need to be brought up in the argument for giving out reparations, but there are so many things that could be said. So while Coates does a fantastic job discussing important points—like how reparations are not a new idea, and there are people still being affected by racism today—he paints an even more clear picture in his novel. Because it is a novel, he has time to expand upon individual experiences, and go deeper into what kinds of things happen in black neighborhoods in his lifetime. His novel also does things that the article wasn't meant to do, because it is written in second person. While the article gives a frank argument to encourage the average middle class white male to think about why we need reparations today, the book cuts out the awkward formalness of white people being nervous to discuss racism. By making the book in second person and addressing it to his son, Coates's primary audience shifts from some random white person, to his son, who is also black. It takes away the burden from Coates of having to try to white-proof his work, and make it something a white person would approve of. Because while he still expects white people to read it, he is not talking to them; he is talking to his son. This probably seems like it could be accomplished without the use of second person, but Coates uses it to talk about specific experiences he shared with his son, and how they affected both of them. For instance, when Coates talks about the release of Michael Brown's killers, he shows how his son was feeling, as well as his personal thoughts and feelings about the event, and his son's reaction to the event. He is brutally honest as he reflects on this, and if he were writing "to" an audience other than his son, Coates's revelations about what he and his son were feeling would not be as personal, emotional, or powerful. So while the article Coates published got his point across clearly, it didn't convey the same amount of emotion as his novel. The article touched on personal topics, like an individual and his story about the oppression that reparations would try to make up for, but it was meant to be in a different tone than the novel. The novel is very informal and confidential, whereas the article is meant to be shared, and a much more formal thesis. With both of these pieces, Ta-Nehisi Coates elaborates eloquently about the disparity between how white people say everything is okay, and how it actually is. He gives a personal account in his novel, and a compelling argument in his article.