Violence In The Invisible Man

Words: 1076
Pages: 5

As we have seen over the years, many people have risen to power. Many have risen up to power, however many have also fallen from power. So what allows some to rise and stay in power and not others? Dictators such as Saddam Hussein and Napoleon Bonaparte remained in power for many years. Comparatively Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq for twenty-four years, likewise Bonaparte, the dictator of France, held power for fourteen years. How could one be in power longer than the other? While analyzing both of them, I found that Saddam Hussein was more willing to use violent methods to control his people, whereas Napoleon Bonaparte was more civilized and believed that he didn’t need to use violence. So does violence secure one’s place in power for longer? The novel The Invisible Man seems to say that violence does protect your place in power. …show more content…
Starting in chapter one, in a scene known as the battle royal. The battle royal is an event where white men have brought in many African Americans one of them was the main protagonist, the main protagonist wanted to be there because they told him that they wanted him to deliver his graduation speech. Sadly, this was not the reality of the situation as they brought him their not to deliver his speech, but to fight. The protagonist saying “Everyone fought hysterically. It was complete anarchy. Everybody was fighting everybody.” (Emerson). While in this scenario the white men in power, were not directly involved, they were using the fight to control the protagonist. He vigorously wanted to deliver his speech and during the fight all he could think about was giving his speech. The white people controlling this madness had manipulated him intensely. Using his desire to give the speech to make him fight, and the stronger his desire got, the more violent he and his opponents became. Simply they were using other people violence to control the protagonist and exert their power over