Can Rufus be as bad as he seems? YES.

Kindred Revisited

“This is the biggest lot of abolitionist trash I ever saw.”

“No it isn’t,” I said. “That book wasn’t even written until a century after slavery was abolished.”

“Then why the hell are they still complaining about it?” (140, Butler).

This quote really caught my attention and made stopped me in my tracks while reading Kindred by Octavia Butler. I had to pause and think in the middle of reading this chapter. I wondered how different our perspectives and frames of reference, as Americans and simply as human beings, can have so greatly changed in the last hundred years. True, it was only half a century ago that we passed civil rights. It was less than a century ago when we gave women equal suffrage. I recognize we are still far behind the times, and it was only recently that this nation had really given its citizens equal opportunity. However, it seems so unrealistic that the horrors of slavery could go unnoticed and/or ignored by so many people. Of course the slaves understood the terror within their lives and the inequality, but how could those in the government, those who stood for liberation, revolution, separatism of church and state, believe in the institution of slavery. The north was represented as the intellectual and equal region of our nation, but in truth it was just as dangerous to be a freedman as it was in the south. The fugitive slave act ensured that.

In the novel, Rufus is attached to and respectful of Dana as a child. He even respects her opinion over that of his own mother. He is not afraid of her, but sees her as a guardian and listens to her advice. Why does this change with age? He is a product of his times, but he is also aware of another time where Africans and African-Americans are equal to Caucasians in the United States. Dana is far more educated than Rufus’ own parents, and Rufus acknowledges this. So what went wrong? I’d like to talk more about this transition between Rufus as a child and Rufus as an adult.

When Rufus is a child, he seems to respect Dana more than his own mother.

Rufus even makes his mother cry by yelling at her to leave him alone. When Dana notices this all Rufus can say is that, “She always cries.” When Dana asks if that is how he usually speaks to his mother he responds, “I have to [talk to her like that], or she won’t leave me alone. Daddy does it too” (Butler, 104). It is obvious that Rufus is a product of his times and the examples set within his own household, yet he can look past this when he addressed Dana. He respects her as a teacher and cannot get enough of her reading aloud. He know she should not be able to read if she was an ordinary slave born in the late eighteenth century, and that she is from another time and place. She is different, equal, and someone to be respected. Rufus asks Dana about her education freely in a private conversation:

“Nigel said your mother was a school teacher.”

“She was.”

“I like the way you read. It’s almost like being there watching everything happen.” (Butler, 87).

Rufus appreciates Dana’s intelligence and education. He doesn’t see it as disrespect but as a gift that he can benefit from. Yet once it directly affects him, and his authority within his household, he becomes outraged and suspicious. Maybe her education will give other slaves ideas. I never gave this much thought either. Maybe he does understand the equality between the “races” but if he is also a victim of his times like the slaves. Of course, he is not really a true victim, as he is privileged and never brutally beaten on a whim. He is free and can do as he pleases, but maybe he does have some sympathy for his slaves. I cannot really find any evidence to support this in his later years, but he does love Alice for who she is and respects Dana as an equal. I’d like to return to this when we go over it in class and elaborate after any response I may get. I’d like to hear your opinions!

Parallels between Kevin and Rufus

Kindred

In class we began to draw comparisons between the two main male characters, Rufus and Kevin. Dana interacts with these males in two very different settings, but is there a parallel? Their relationships with Dana could not be any more different, but despite this, are they somehow interrelated? I want to further explore these differences and similarities as to further understand Butler’s intentions when she wrote the novel. Is there a cycle of oppression we now assume has ended, but that really is still as strong as ever? I believe we may feel disconnected from our past, from the racism that has left a black mark on our nation’s history, but it is still as prevalent today as it was a century or more ago. Of course, this racism has mutated, and matured into a subtler and arguably more complex form of bigotry. The power dynamics between Dana and the males in her life may give further analysis into Butler’s social critique of contemporary racism.

Rufus is given obvious, and extreme, authority and agency in Dana’s life. He is a white slave-owner in a slave state prior to the American Civil War. Kevin is a loving husband, with an assumed equality to his wife; he is caring, concerned, protective, and understanding. However, Kevin is also given authority and unequal power in Dana’s life that is not as obviously illustrated as Rufus’ advantages are. He is a Caucasian male, a published writer, and is a decade older than Dana; these are attributes our society equates with privilege and advantage. Our society is sexist, and Kevin is obviously male; our society is racist, and Kevin is white; our society values age and rank, and Kevin is almost a father figure with his white hair and ten year seniority over Dana. I do not mean to make these vast generalizations about our society, especially ones with a negative light, hastily. I just want to point out the majority of our congressmen, our democratically elected representatives, are white, male, and old. That says something about our voting population, and the greater society within this nation.

Past this superficial preferences Kevin has now been assigned, his character also demonstrates a sort of power dynamic that is skewed in Kevin’s favor between the two. Dana is expected to type for Kevin, to do menial and secretarial work, and suffers emotional abuse, to an extent, when she refuses to comply. She is discouraged from entering Kevin’s apartment after her refusal, and he wonders why she decided to come back. “He said if [Dana] couldn’t do him a little favor [she] could leave,” so Dana had the strength to leave. However, when she comes back Kevin was surprised and at the door said, “You came back” in disbelief, or possibly resentment, without any preceding salutation. The dialogue continues as follows, “Didn’t you want me to? / Well, … sure. Will you type those pages for me now? / No. / Damnit, Dana!” Kevin is obviously expecting Dana to be subservient, even if it is only with a small clerical task. He assumes she will give in and do his bidding, and is angered when she doesn’t comply. This is oddly reminiscent of Dana's interactions with Rufus, who is in disbelief when she asks him to call her a black woman, or when she refuses to be treated like a subhuman. Rufus also lashes out in anger, and later on in the novel, forces Dana to suffer serious and violent consequences for any disrespect or retaliation Dana may give him. Dana does not even have to do anything morally wrong to upset the two men, she merely stands up for herself. She did not want to type for Kevin, and she does not limit herself and her intellect in front of Rufus.

I plan on continuing this blog after this next class period. I think the similarities grow during the latter half of the novel.

Today I wanted to discuss the story The Shawl. And specifically the actual shawl itself and how it relates to Magda and Rosa.
While being the mother of a young child Rosa wants the best for her daughter and to be able to give her everything she wants. But, while being locked away in a camp Rosa is unable to do this. The only way Magda will eat is from breast-feeding from Rosa, but that could only last so long and “the weight of Rosa was turning into less and less.” She could no longer continue to feed Magda properly and was not getting enough nutrients herself.
Once Stella had taken away Magda’s shawl, Magda had “flopped onward with her little pencil legs scribbling this way and that in search of the shawl”. This little girl saw the shawl as one of her little sisters someone who would always be there for her in this time of cold and desperation need.
Rosa was actually happy when the day she saw that her little girl was going to die. It is very wrong when a mother wants her little child to die. I could never imagine this in my life but if you’re in such a terrible situation and a horrible surrounding that might actual happen. The pain and anguish that Rosa goes through is something I think no one ever wants to feel. But is very mature as a mother to let her daughter go to a better place in her life.

yellow wallpaper

I would like to discuss the yellow wallpaper. Specifically the patriarchal society that is in the story. The narrator starts off the story by explaining how she is sick. Her sickness doesn’t sound like anything to drastic but the doctor and husband’s solution does sound drastic. The doctor tells her that she needs rest and relaxation by herself for months. Today this type of solution sounds crazy, and the narrator knows that this doesn’t sound right at all. But she knows that her word cannot stand up against her husband and a doctor’s word. She gives into this sort treatment very easily without even putting up a fight. Without even putting up a fight I feel like she knows that a woman’s word does not stand a chance against a man’s word at this day and age. The narrator explains “If a physician of high standing, and one’s own husband, assures friends and relatives that there is really nothing the matter with one but temporary nervous depression- a slight hysterical tendency- what is one to do?” (page 1) This just shows the authoritative husband at work telling his wife what she will do, not even asking.

I would like to talk about the beginning of “The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I feel that the start of this story perfectly lays out the rest of this novel. The main concepts laid out in the first couple of chapters include: Family corruption, women, and poverty.

Douglass first shares with us that the children don’t even know their own ages, or even there own parents. The slave families are torn apart before the child even knows his own mother or father. Just thinking of not knowing my own age or real parents would be very scary. I feel like I wouldn’t be true to myself nor would I be myself. Douglass started the novel this way in order to show you the corrupt life of a slave. And how the slaves’ life isn’t really their life at all it is their owners. This simple example shows the corruption of slavery, slave-owners, and the way slavery was kept in tact. Slave-owners would even rape the women slave in order to produce new slaves for them. It is a disgusting and brutal circle of events that the slaves go through nearly everyday of their never-ending life.

Women do have an important but small role in the first section of Douglass’s life. Most almost all slaves do not know their mother, but in Douglass’s case it is a little different. Although they were split at birth Douglass and his mother are able to meet. On certain nights Douglass’s mother walks 10 miles in the middle of the night in order to hold her son in her arms while he sleeps. She then wakes up early in order to walk home. It is a sad a devastating story and nothing close to a real family bond. This is why when Douglass hears about his mother’s death it does not severely affect him. Yes, he is saddened for a minute but not for more than a minute.

Douglass’s life starts out with his identity and family being torn apart from him. But throughout the novel he gains back both of these things in order to live a healthy life.

First Read of Frederick Douglass

I have finished the novel and am still contemplating the many ironies and elucidations of the text. As we discussed in the previous class period, Colonel Lloyd and the overseers see any reason applicable to punish the slaves severely. Brutal punishments were incurred by trivial actions, such as feeding the horses food that was too wet or too dry. This by the way would be entirely impossible to tell by Lloyd unless he physically handled the food before the animals consumed it. This illusion of law, of crime and punishment, is much like the greater illusion of law in the Nation. The Fugitive Slave Act was an unjust law, the legality of slavery was unconstitutional, and the slave trade went against the ideals of the American Revolution. The corruption of the “law” on the plantations was equally as brutal as the corruption of law in Washington. While the congressmen of Washington may not have physically assaulted slaves, the allowance of slave states in the union was extremely detrimental to the American Values they so valued, not mentioning the quality of life for the entire slave population, and African-American freedmen as well. No Caucasian person would testify against another Caucasian who killed a slave; they valued the lives of slaves as equal to a horse, cow, or pig, literally. Slaves were seen as inhuman, as merely valuable property to be exchanged as easily as money may be transferred from one hand to another.

This is what is really ironic, those viewed as inhuman, the slaves, are not the one who act inhumanely. The slave drivers and overseers act with the viciousness and disregard as a common animal, with no empathy for another human being. Empathy is one of the main distinctions between our species and that of other animals, at least in my opinion. The reversal of roles is quite evident in the many gruesome examples provided by Douglass, such as when a white woman, Mrs. Giles Hicks, beats a 15-year-old slave to death for falling asleep while in the room with her during her watch over the baby. Mr. Gore was easy to kill a slave without remorse, to set an example for the others.

Well I will return to this blog after the next class discussion to further my illustrations of irony and role-switching as employed by Douglass.

Benito Cereno and Justice in a Segregated America

In Benito Cereno, by Herman Melville, it immediately becomes obvious that the “villain” Babo is not given the equality or just right to have a voice. He must use actions to voice his opinions and ideals, and must strive for freedom silently. The practicality of his silence connects to the charade he and the crew must keep up to trick Delano they have not revolted, and to manipulate the predispositions of Delano, who is ambivalent on the issue of slavery and expects subservience from the Africans. The character of Delano in this regard is an allusion to the American public as a whole; American society believed in the ideals of liberty and freedom in a post-civil war society, yet were bound to the fugitive slave act. Northerners who were abolitionists or merely sympathizers were also threatened with persecution and legal prosecution, while any African or African-American was susceptible to capture and questioning by any White citizen, whether fugitive or freedman.

In this time in history maroon societies existed in the Caribbean with their own sense of independence and freedom, yet also had the constant threat of capture in the background. Much like the ship, the Africans led their own community without the influence of White leadership or society, yet they were also very susceptible to attack. By the time Benito Cereno was written, maroon societies dwindled in the Caribbean, but some remained on the larger islands. Much like the Africans surrounded by hostile nations in the open waters, so did maroon societies exist in isolated locations surrounded by plantations off the mountains. In this sense, Melville is very critical of the American ideals versus the harsh realities the world was living in. The United States was living in a state of extreme hypocrisy, at the expense of many lives.

Going back to Babo as a character however, as a singular person he is equally stranded amongst characters with negative predispositions towards him. He is still a slave, no matter how loyal or competent he may appear to Delano. This confusion of Delano mirrors the process of pulling prejudices from the reader; is he a super villain with exceptional cunning, or an equal to the White captains, just reacting to his position with intelligent decision-making? His educational background is unclear, which leaves the readers with a gray area to decipher as to whether or not Babo is extremely intelligent, more so than his Captain, or an equal in learning. I prefer to think it is the former, as Babo seems to be not only cunning and calculative, but intelligent in a less vicious sense, and is merely reacting to the horrible condition fate, and man, has placed him in, in the unjust role of a slave.