"I wouldn't dare act as thought I didn't believe." -- Kevin
"I believe you. I don't understand, like Dana said, but I guess I believe." -- Rufus
"I don't want to believe you, but I guess I do." -- Nigel
"I thought Rufus and Kevin had probably old him enough to enable him to understand, whether he believed or not. And perhaps he did understand. He seemed to get angrier." -- Dana, about Tom Weylin
Belief and non-belief often seem to be mutually exclusive. If you believe the earth is flat, then that is that. For you, that is a fact of your perspective. I propose, however, that belief has many different shades and manifestations. What exactly constitutes acceptance or understanding is fluid, and hence, belief itself is also fluid.
Tom Weylin's reaction to Dana's secret seems to me to be the most indicative of the dichotomy between different levels of belief. As Dana puts it, when Tom Weylin 'understands', he more vehemently refuses that her secret might actually be the truth. Whatever type of comprehension takes place in his head, or even -- since the situation is fairly illogical -- in his gut, for Tom Weylin the last defense of belief or disbelief is his willingness to accept.
Yet the reactions of some of the other characters, especially that of Nigel, it seems that willingness might not always be necessary to believe something. From Rufus's reaction, understanding itself is unnecessary as well. From Kevin's reaction, the deciding factor seems to be pragmatism, yet in almost all of the earlier cases, the only pragmatic result of belief is some possible peace of mind about the issue.
In Kindred, Dana encounters a host of characters who are forced to interact with the impossible and then reconcile it with their own sense of reality. The ability to adapt belief, from a collegiate perspective, is possibly the greatest asset for this reconciliation -- being openminded enough that where perspective jars with truth, perspective will give way. The methods and reasons for which belief is adapted are obviously many, however, and the degree to which these characters believe or accept Dana's situation varies, particularly since she herself adapts to whichever time period that she currently inhabits, "acting" out a role, so as to keep other characters from having to confront the 'insanity' of her situation.
Even if truth and lies were well within the range of clear definition, humankind's relationship with truth and lies could still be complex and unpredictable. The fluidity of belief, the degree to which people can accept truth without actually confronting it, and the ability of a person to understand without believing has implications, I think, for the truth-seeking individual.
It suggests that individuals themselves have a role in the construction of a relationship with truth. They have the duty to prepare themselves to not only encounter, but confront issues of authenticity and uncomfortable, jarring ideas. Otherwise, as Mr. Tagomi experiences in Man in the High Castle, reality might flicker past without being recognized or welcomed.
Very interesting point about truth and lies being complex no matter what because of the fluidity of belief/perspective. Everything depends on perspective, even concrete things that are plain and obvious can shift from person to person. For example, some call it "turquoise" others call it "light blue" and there's that one person who insists that it's "baby blue"--we all see a color and yet we all interpret it differently. In the end, we all associate different characteristics to what we see and experience so at the end of the day everything is somewhat fluid and blurred. We see what we want to see and we are stubborn--we do not open up to other ideas and perspectives easily--human traits that Butler does a good job in portraying from character to character as you pointed out above.
ReplyDelete