White Liberalism in Invisible Man's Mr. Norton

In Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man we’re presented with a rather interesting white character: Mr. Norton. Mr. Norton is a white progressive philanthropist type in that he funnels copious amounts of wealth and resources into the welfare of the African-American community in an act of self-fulfillment. But he is very unlike the white liberals we have encountered thus far. In Native Son, the closest people we encounter to Mr. Norton are the Dalton family, in particular Mr. Dalton. Both are very financially successful, presumably well-respected in the general community, and have devoted resources to the African-American community. When we first are introduced to Mr. Norton, we see him through a very similar lens to the one we see Mr. Dalton through: The black protagonist who feels every need to be/act submissive around him. Both characters also refer to “your people”, further distancing themselves from the black man before them. However, despite performing similar deeds, Mr. Norton still appears to be a rather distinct character from Mr. Dalton.

The primary difference is the fact that Mr. Norton genuinely seems to be invested in the welfare of the African-American community. While Mr. Dalton donates ping-pong tables and allows African-American families to live in his homes, he has little concern for the actual value of said ping-pong tables or for the living conditions of said African-American families. Basically, he is throwing bundles of flowers at the black community out of supposed goodwill and telling them to do with it as they see fit. At no point does he think to ask the African-American community what they need or how they are feeling, it is not until Max explains it to him that he learns and even then appears not to comprehend. Mr. Dalton is, like many people and many white philanthropist types, primarily concerned with his own good fortune.  Mr. Norton on the other hand appears to believe that his good fortune is tied to the fortune of the African-American community he has involved himself in (or so he says). He funds a university for African-Americans much in the same way that Mr. Dalton donates ping-pong tables for African-Americans. But unlike Mr. Dalton, he seems particularly concerned with the productivity of the university. His concern for the future welfare of the black students (including the narrator) stretches so far as to include what happens beyond the university.  He says that whatever occupation they take up affects him, almost as if he cares about their well-being. But this sweet sentiment is reduced by the fact that he directly links it to himself, to his own success and not purely out of sympathy for the black race.

But since whatever happens to students determines his own fate, Norton asks the Narrator to tell him his fate, by doing so not simply downplaying the master-servant dynamic that is typically present, but completely subverting it. In doing so, he shows that he holds the black population to a certain degree of importance. In fact, Norton holds them to a higher esteem than the Invisible Man does, since Norton is intrigued and willing to talk to a disgraced black rapist, even going so far as to give him a hundred dollars while the Narrator is disgusted by the man. He speaks to black people with a high level of interest, if not seeming respect, as if he is willing to learn, something never showed in philanthropists like Dalton.

That degree importance, however, is not as noble as we might hope. Mr. Norton is a very business-minded individual. He speaks with pride when telling of the success he and the Founder had in building the University. A minor thing, but he perks up enough to voice his opinion at the mention of the famed entrepreneur Rockefeller, despite having been unconscious for the majority of the scene prior. Perhaps his supposed concern for the black population is not out of goodwill, but out of interest for a potential business operation. Perhaps he sees them as assets, a steady cash flow from his University and something to build up his reputation if they find success after school. What may be most telling is that he often refers to black individuals as a collective, a hive mind. He constantly uses phrases like “your people”, insinuating their movement in tandem. Even when speaking to the individuality of African-American people, he uses “cog”, insinuating their part in a larger system he has devised for them, as if they work for him rather than being students. A very telling statement is when the Narrator asks him if he saw the ox team (presumably black or lower class) and Norton says that he “cannot see it for the trees” much in the same way he cannot see the black community as individuals. He worships business and industry, not goodwill, and as such he revels in the idea of “tens of thousands of lives dependent upon his ideas and upon his actions”, having control over such a large operation like the Founder had is Norton’s wet dream. A black man even calls him out on his inability to care for black people as individuals in chapter three, to which he responds with an amount of anger we haven’t heretofore observed, which suggests his pride has been wounded at the truth in the accusation. Black people, you could even say, are invisible to him as separate entities.

A very important question to consider however, is: How beneficial is Norton’s perspective? If it's true that he sees them as a collective system, then it's obvious he doesn’t care about them the same way most people care about other people. But he does still care about them to the extent that they can make a profit for him. Take this in contrast with Mr. Dalton, who only seems to care about his image and conscience and not about the African-American community as individuals or assets. With Norton at least there is a sense that he will vehemently defend his assets, regardless of whether or not he feels for them. Imagine if all white liberals were like Mr. Norton. Not searching around for a sense of fulfillment from black people, but merely seeing the potential of them as a collective, and doing everything they can to protect that collective. Not seeing them as something lesser and pitiful, but not seeing them at all really, since they are invisible, generally leaving them alone if their profits aren’t hurt. Then at least one could influence the actions of white liberals by promising to benefit their business ventures. Would that be better?