Sweet Whispers in its totality, was… well, just “okay”. There were some dislikes along the storyline, but, fortunately, enough surprises to carry me through to finally mildly enjoying the piece.
I’ll admit that when I started the book, the African American Vernacular was a little difficult for me to decipher. Perhaps decipher isn’t the best choice of words, more like the phrase hard-to-get-my-rhythm is more of an accurate description of my predicament. The same phenomenon happened when I read Pearl Cleage’s What Looks Like Crazy On An Ordinary Day and Elizabeth George’s What Came Before He Shot Her. Cleage & George used the same writing style true to the roots of African American culture. Once I was about half way though the book, things started to click and the story just progressed, flowed, and came together in an intriguing plot.
The same was true with Sweet Whispers. I believe that Sweet Whispers couldn’t have been written any other way by Hamilton. To quote Hamilton, herself, “if a race has no history, if it has no worthwhile tradition, it becomes a negligible factor in the thought of the world”. If Hamilton wouldn’t have written the narrative of Tree, and the dialog among the characters in the tradition of their culture, I don’t think it would have been as striking of a story for me. As Lea states in her article, “by virtue of the ‘right’ categorization or label, if one is deemed to fit in, an individual is assured a place in the community” (p. 56). Tree’s “community” is her African American culture. When M’Vy tries to make her speak more “intelligently”, she is ultimately telling her to try her best to fit into the white community, not her own. This “duality” conflict is nicely supported by Lea’s article; a fabulous companion to reading Sweet Whispers.
I was surprised by Hamilton’s use of Brother Rush. I think that another set-back from instantaneous attraction to Sweet Whispers was that I really didn’t understand the fact that Brother Rush could be seen by Tree, Dabney, and Miss Pricherd but didn’t seem visible to the boys on the street? Equally as odd, why couldn’t M’Vy see Brother Rush? For some reason, I wanted Brother Rush to be exclusively Tree’s; Tree’s secret, Tree’s prized possession that could take her away from the trials of her everyday chores of existence. This exclusivity would have made me feel more like Sweet Whispers was actually a “fantasy” novel. For some reason the availability of Brother Rush made me feel the story was of normal, everyday happenings.
So, I’m sure you’re probably wondering what I actually liked about the book. I think what drew me in and kept me coming back was how relatable Tree was in her yearning for family, heritage, and connection. The book truly echoed Sobat’s concept of “rememory”; particularly her notion of the “living-dead”. When Sobat states “a person who is physically dead but alive in the memory…is remembered…” and when the memory is gone, so is the person, she is putting words to what Tree is starving for: connection to herself through her family and her history, so that she is not forgotten. Two of my favorite quotes from the book that resonate with this sentiment are:
“Tree and Dab never had time to find out about the past, they had so little of the present” (p. 50)
&
“If you never told there’s some answers, how you gone know the questions?” (p. 135)
Coming of age, moment of reckoning, the turning point between never being the same and never turning back to who you were… these are themes of Sweet Whispers, Brother Rush. I believe that one of the defining moments in a young girl’s coming of age is the realization that her mother is fallible. Towards the end of the book, Tree realized what Baker stated in her article, “it [the reckoning:] allows her [Tree:] to lose her self-consciousness and to find comfort and confidence in her physical being, to exercise the power that has always been hers” (p. 249).
After further reflection, I do not necessarily feel that M’Vy’s faults were the sole catalysts of Tree’s coming of age. Sobat definitely struck a chord in my reflection of the piece when she wrote, “‘rememory’ [is:] so essential to both girls’ mythic quests for selfhood, identity, and ultimately survival” (p. 168). I believe that Tree realized, through Brother’s “travels”, her roots, her sending-culture, and all the reasons she is who she is and my M’Vy is who M’Vy is. This realization echoes Hamilton’s musings on two hearts, the battle of “two allegiances, the one, of being black and the other, of being American” (p. 17). For Tree, I believe she also fought an additional battle of two hearts: her heart for the past and her heart for her new future. I believe that both Tree’s past and M’Vy were the cause for Tree’s growing pains just as Hamilton states, “we carry our pasts with us in the present through states of mind, family history and historical fact” (p. 16).
Coming of age, moment of reckoning, the turning point between never being the same and never turning back… these are themes emerging in Sweet Whispers, Brother Rush. The characters grew to realize that they, their friends, their family, and even society were fallible. This realization turns to liberation but not without struggle and not without pain. I am beginning to realize that fantasy is truly about educating readers on the power, albeit it sometimes unpleasant, of transformation. I believe Lea would agree, for she opens her article with a similar tone, “the secondary worlds created in fantasy encourage the reader to compare and contrast the real world with the imaginary…fantasy as a genre can be transformative” (p. 51).