A Jean Toomer Reader: Selected Unpublished Writings

African American Review, Spring, 1996 by Rudolph P. Byrd

While not so much in evidence in other sections of Invisible Darkness, Larson's slippery hold upon the conventions of fairness and impartiality assumes its most troubling manifestation in the final section of the biography. In recalling Elmer S. Imes's dalliances, Larson moves to that same well-known tendency in Toomer and, most incredibly, writes that it was Larsen's "good fortune that she did not become another name on Jean's list of sexual conquests, though she shares an affinity with some of his victims" (198). Most preposterously, the "victims" are none other than Mabel Dodge Luhan and Margery Latimer. Larson provides nothing in the way of new evidence to support this fresh charge of sexual exploitation, and this uncharitable and false charge compromises the integrity of his biography.

Was Luhan victimized by Toomer? One of Luhan's letters to Toomer which appears in the carefully researched biography of Kerman and Eldridge tells a decidedly different story: "You see, Jean, I am trying to subjugate your will to mine - it is my talent - my whole mechanism works together to this end - to seduce your spirit - as I have always been doing." Is this one of the many "pathetic letters" which Larson claims Luhan wrote to Toomer? At the very least, this letter complicates Larson's unsubstantiated claim of Luhan as a "victim" of Toomer's philandering. Setting aside its bogus mysticism, the manipulative prose of Luhan's letter lays bare her intentions: She is determined to "seduce" Toomer. Very fortunately for Toomer, Luhan, who was in her second marriage at the time of this letter's composition, was unsuccessful in the vulgar designs for which she was notorious. Of course, Larson must be familiar with the facts of Luhan's well-known sexual escapades, but he chooses to write a different story.

Was Margery Latimer, in "her brief marriage and awful death," victimized by Toomer? Although far from perfect, the conjugal life of Latimer and Toomer was, as Kerman and Eldridge describe it, marked by mutual admiration and respect. Strangely, Larson holds Toomer responsible for Latimer's death after giving birth to their first and only child. Kerman and Eldridge inform us that it was Latimer's decision to give birth at home, and she did so fully aware of the risks. Kerman and Eldridge also write that Latimer's parents "never presumed any fault in Jean and retained a warm relationship with him thereafter" (206). Surely Larson must be familiar with these facts, but again he chooses to write a different story.

Just as surely as Toomer emerges as the manipulative, sexually obsessed egoist who is fearful of being exposed as a black wolf passing as a white wolf (unfortunately Larson advances a decidedly uncomplex reading of Toomer's extremely complex racial position), Larsen emerges as the principled and disciplined altruist in her final vocation as nurse. "While Jean Toomer enhanced his ego," writes Larson, "Nella Larsen engaged in a totally different relationship with her fellow travellers. While Jean undertook the dubious task of guiding their souls, Nella followed the humanitarian approach and attended to their bodies" (206). In the final moments of the final chapter of Invisible Darkness, Larson smugly praises Larsen's work ethic: "Fortunately, she was talented and hard-working. The evidence is clear that she gave everything she had to her profession as soon as she began her training as a nurse - as she did to her careers as librarian and writer" (207). Of course, the fact that Toomer was not self-supporting after his second marriage only increases our contempt for him and our admiration for Larsen. This is the final and damning judgment which Larson encourages, notwithstanding the encomia of Toomer's achievements as an artist which are scattered throughout the biography.