Angel Of Greenwood

The protagonists, Angel and Isaiah, are dedicated to justice, equality, and progress throughout the novel, but at first, they have different ideas about what “justice” means, which types of change are possible and when, and what the best strategies are to achieve the desired changes. Each character’s stance on these issues is represented through their favorite author, which they argue about often. Isaiah prefers W. E. B. Du Bois’s direct, bold, fast approach to change:

Du Bois spoke to Isaiah’s longing for an active role in the future of his people. Like Du Bois, he was tired of waiting […] Tired of pretending proper in front of ravenous white folks while they drained his community of its hard work and culture. […] And tired, most of all, of anticipating the next attack (14-15).

Isaiah thinks that because there is so much to be done, it needs to start happening right away. Moreover, he doesn’t think slower change guarantees safety because he senses racial violence approaching even in the idyllic Black community of Greenwood.

Conversely, Angel prefers Booker T. Washington’s compassionate, measured, slower approach. Angel thinks it’s best to implement changes slowly and steadily so as not to fuel the fires of racial tension or put too much stress on people who have been through historical trauma. She also thinks that a thriving Black community can exist despite racial segregation:

Black, brilliant, self-sustaining Greenwood Avenue was proof that […] Washington was correct about tolerance and eventual progress. He’d called it ‘Negro Main Street’ [...] Angel saw Washington’s wisdom throughout Greenwood. She also saw it in the railroad tracks, dividing white Tulsa from Black Greenwood. […] Washington gave permission to thrive alongside in segregation (32-33).

She has her doubts about segregation, but she still prioritizes the strategy of slow, measured change because she thinks it’s more likely to be tolerated by those holding the status quo. Isaiah thinks Booker T. Washington’s approach isn’t good enough because it allows structural inequality to remain in place for even longer, but Angel worries Du Bois’s approach could lead to violence or backlash. At first, both characters think that only one of these authors can be correct, so the other one must be wrong. They spend hours poring over books and reconsidering their position on which author is best. This diligence suggests a strong dedication to social change but also a relatively limited perspective on how ideology informs change.

Through further reading and discussion, Angel and Isaiah begin to open their minds to a broader perspective on social change. Their teacher, Miss Ferris, has both books on her shelf, suggesting that she thinks they’re both valuable and can coexist. Still, the teens argue about which is best to the point of insults and tears. Isaiah even thinks it’s his job to “save” Angel from her foolish love of Booker T. Washington and “unshackle” her by converting her into a Du Bois fan. Ultimately, “no one won the Booker T. Washington versus W.E.B. Du Bois argument in that moment. Truth itself won. Truth that neither stolen innocence nor property outweighed stolen esteem for one’s own capabilities” (148). Neither author perfectly articulates a complete guide on how to achieve justice and equality. Instead, when people like Miss Ferris, Angel, and Isaiah read and discuss a variety of authors, they can combine the ideas of many to create the best strategy to engender positive change. Through this discussion, they haven’t fully solidified their ideas, but they have discovered one important thing to remember: Their most valuable tool is the knowledge and faith that they can have a thriving community like Greenwood. This awareness is of the utmost importance before the attack, but especially after it, when the residents are tasked with rebuilding their community. Rather than start believing it’s impossible, which would mean defeat, Isaiah reminds everyone that they had it before and will have it again. Tellingly, he quotes Washington but not Du Bois in this speech, showing how the characters have learned to appreciate both writers and take a variety of ideas into account when strategizing for justice and equality.