Objective:Demonstrate clear argumentation and research in successfully validating a thesis based off close-reading of Native Son and secondary research.What does this mean? I want you to argue a specific position about the novel Native Son, and you need to build this argument off of both close-reading of the novel as well as scholarly research.In Native Son, we are presented with a character that cannot ever be called a hero. He is a murderer and a rapist, a coward and a crook, yet he is also engaging and sympathetic. Bigger Thomas divides most literary groups as some feel that he is an excellent metaphor for the systematic brutality imposed upon African-Americans while others argue that he presents only a negative image of people of color. Native Son is a divisive novel. Many consider it canonical (one of the classics) while others want it banned or ignored.My question for you is this: Based on the historical context of the piece, do you feel that Native Son justifies Bigger’s brutality or is the book too flawed to accurately address the social problems of the late 1930s in America?You will answer this in a 8 page, full MLA format essay. You must include at least 3 secondary sources that focus on the context of the novel. You may not use any critical sources that address this question (it is a common question, so I want you to come up with your own viewpoint and defend it), so all of your research needs to focus on exploring the socio-political and historical context of the novel. You are trying to prove to me if Bigger is justified by the real world situation of the author or the contrary position. This may seem easy, but it is a difficult question. Bigger makes his own choices, and you do not want to make it seem like he is “innocent”, but you also need to balance the reality that he is under pressures that many are not, and so it becomes almost inevitable that some individuals under these pressures will snap. You need to be researching via scholarly sources, and seeing as how this novel can sometimes reflect our present time, feel free to draw parallels to the present. You can also focus on the social problems of the 1930s, namely if a book like this with its violence actually tried to help deal with these problems or simply made them worse. There is a lot of places to go here, but I do ask you have a clear argument to defend.