Ignoring the blatantly attention-grabbing nature of the
title, I would like to address the lack of character development, first brought
to my attention in Michael’s post “What Characters?” I had an almost comic-like reaction when I
read the lines, “He [Kevin] was an unusual-looking white man” (54). Wait…
what??? I thought he was black!
The assessment of Kevin’s race was not only based on my
expectation of a homogenous couple but also the police’s suspicious attempts to
get Dana to blame Kevin for her injury. I
thought that the police attempted to unfairly blame Kevin because of their
prejudice against him. After discovering
Kevin’s racial identity, ashamed of my reliance on stereotyping, I once again
looked through the text to identify the key line I had skipped over. All I discovered about Kevin’s physical
characteristic was his “kind of pale, almost colorless eyes” (13). Knowing that I wasn’t delusional, I let out a
sigh of relief, and then, I wondered, “Why?”
I drew the conclusion that Octavia Butler has the reader’s
experience reflect the character’s experiences.
I paralleled the shock that I received from discovering that Dana and
Kevin were an interracial couple with Dana’s own discovery that she could trace
her family roots to Rufus, a slave owner’s son.
Our experience as readers is actual two-fold Dana’s experience. While Dana is thrown into the unknown
environment of the past, we are thrown into an unknown environment of not only
the past but also Dana’s present.
Similar to Michael’s conclusion, I believe that the flatness of the
character serves as a effective medium for a more personal experience.
I personally feel that the lack of emphasis on Kevin's race is because in the time they start in race is not an issue. At the same time it is mentioned because it will matter once they both end up in the past. I do like your pointing out of Dana and Kevin's relationship being similar to the interracial relationship of Rufus and Dana's other relatively, I believe it is Alice but I cold be wrong. That might be why she was brought back to that point of her lineage because it was an unknown interracial relationship in her families past.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point you bring up, and I think that only furthers the claim that we are not reading this novel for the characters but for the story/the emotions of the story. If character details are only brought up out of necessity to advance the story, then it must not be the focus. I do believe Alice is Rufus's partner, and I begin to wonder about the time paradox. It just boggles my mind a bit that she must go back to a distant past to ensure her existence. In some ways, she's playing a messed up version of matchmaker.
ReplyDeleteI actually read an interview with Octavia Butler about the book, and she said that she wrote the book to have readers "feel what it was like to be a slave". But even though her intention was to make us feel emotions rather than understand the characters, I think The Things They Carried showed that both can be done.
ReplyDeleteThe flatness of the characters bothers me too because I feel as though it is the one aspect that is keeping me from diving into the book. The first person narration really brings you close to what is happening and if Dana had more of a character I think I would be even more concerned and get more of an emotion from it.
Update since my last blog post: I actually found that the chapter right after the assigned reading for last week helped fill in the characters enough to the point where it doesn't bother me. It seems like a much better balance now that they have a little bit more of a believable relationship. I agree it's still a little bit flat, but it's helped me to focus more on the other aspects of the book.
ReplyDelete