If Beale Street Could Talk and James Baldwin's "The Man Child" are two texts that demonstrate how the isolation of characters can lead to overtly violent results. Although the perspective through which Baldwin challenges dominant forces differs between the two texts, the race of the protagonists appears to be the underlying factor in how the characters experience and combat their own oppression, if they experience it at all. These different forms of oppression range from gender inequality to hate crimes, but Tish and Fonny's families are subjected to a condition in which they are trapped in their isolation and status with no viable means of escape. There are many similarities between the characters in If Beale Street Could Talk and "The Man Child," but Baldwin's black characters lack the ability to exist in a space that promotes freedom, action, or even l 'love ; those who face similar forces of oppression experience them differently, particularly due to the fact that white characters are not subjected to a hellish wasteland. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay As Baldwin expresses in both stories, those who are able to exist comfortably within the confines of American ideology live lives less restricted by oppression. strengths. At the beginning of If Beale Street Could Talk, Tish expresses the restrictive nature of the prison and church corridors. Tish describes the situation: "I swear New York must be the ugliest, dirtiest city in the world... If any place is worse, it must be so close to hell that you can feel the people trying to fry. And, come to think of it, that's exactly what New York smells like in summer” (Beale Street, 9). Whether it's New York or Puerto Rico, Baldwin depicts both places as literal and metaphorical wastelands that people of color are forced to inhabit. In “The Man Child,” Eric and his family view the space and land they own as opportunity through the patriarchal quest for happiness. Although Jaime may be ostracized from Eric's family, he is still a white man and therefore has the means and opportunity to gain a stronghold in the American landscape. As Baldwin writes, "Eric rode on his father's shoulders across the vast green fields that belonged to him, to the courtyard that sheltered the house and which would hear the first cries of his children" ("The Man Child", 74). The land for Eric's loved ones is something they have the ability to own because their space is neither limiting nor repressing. The land inherited from Eric thus becomes a physical representation of an American idealism that brings hope as well as agriculture: two key values ​​of American philosophy. The contrasting nature of these two texts and the way space is perceived within them demonstrates how Baldwin proclaims that the differences between black and white families cause black families to experience hell on earth while white families experience power through to the property. Despite Baldwin's tendency to write from the male perspective, he did not shy away from exploring the role of women in his works. In both texts, Baldwin highlights how powerful gender stereotypes lock women into boxes so restrictive that their value comes solely from their ability to reproduce. Women are just vessels for new life, as the stories of Tish and Eric's mothers show. In If Beale Street Could Talk, the child represents hope, something vital and necessary to black life. In “The Man Child,”the deceased child was only a representation of the nuclear family; as son and heir, Eric is at the center of the narrative. As is typical in American inheritance practices, Eric, the first born male, will gain the land after his father's death. Therefore, Eric's mother's children have the ability to both own and acquire land. This compares to Tish and Fonny's child, who was born in a hellish wasteland. Characters like Tish are sometimes victims of internalized sexism, heteronormativity, and racism; Fonny faces similar circumstances. In the city and in the lives of black people, there is nothing to be gained except the representation of hope despite the dangerous conditions of their existence, at least in Baldwin's stories. The pressures of gender expression and masculinity exist as options in both texts, but it is Fonny's expression. of white hegemonic masculinity which leads him to end up in prison. Both texts proclaim that there are overwhelming forces of gender policing that yield to violence, but that if black men fall into these practices, then their freedom is in danger. Fonny explains the cycle in which oppressive forces reject the existence of black masculinity: “They put us in a trap bag, baby. It’s hard, but I just want you to keep in mind that they can make us lose each other by putting me in trouble” (Beale Street, 142). Although Fonny's act of protecting Tish from the Italian thug is justifiable by moral law, it is unacceptable for a black man to protect his partner at the expense of white men's pride or authority. This act directly lands Fonny in prison, as the target of his retaliation is an individual allowed to exist within the confines of white American masculinity. Unlike Fonny, Jaime expresses his masculinity by killing Eric and asserting his power over things that are supposed to belong. Jaime retorts when chastised for hurting the dog: "It's my beast." And a man has a right to do as he pleases with whatever is his” (“The Man Child,” 64). Jaime's ability to take ownership is something that Fonny, like other black characters in Baldwin's work, is unable to experience due to his race. Although the two texts have very different protagonists, the characters of Jaime and Daniel can be seen as foils because they have difficulty expressing themselves. their masculinity and their sense of oppression in their own liminal spaces or, simply, in their bodies. Considering the nomination of these two figures is essential in attempting to understand their roles as foils and as fighters against American ideological systems, particularly as they relate to masculinity. Baldwin’s “Here Be Dragons” explicitly speaks to the violence that presents itself in American masculinity. Baldwin writes of the American ideal of sexuality and masculinity: "This ideal has created cowboys and Indians, good guys and bad guys, punks and studs, tough guys and softies, butch and fags, blacks and whites. It is an ideal so cripplingly infantile that it has virtually prohibited—as an unpatriotic act—the American boy from evolving into the complexity of manhood” (“Here Be Dragons,” 678). Sexuality is therefore rooted in a kind of violent dichotomy, as are other factors like race, gender and masculinity. It is through this same theory that Daniel's story becomes a tragic story of ideological marginalization. Sexual violence, as Baldwin emphasizes in many of his texts, is a tool used for the sexual gratification of white men, and.