Since the beginning of the semester we have asked
ourselves what history and fiction mean in relation to each other, and where
the fine line of differentiation lies. Continuing this search for knowledge, we
embark on our literary journey with Kindred
pondering over the question of how the form of fiction is significant in
bringing the atmosphere of 19th century slave life to an audience. In
short, the answer would be that Octavia E. Butler specifically chooses to write
a work of fiction with the purpose of creating the most meaningful and vivid account
of the racist society the book is centered on. As opposed to a historical text,
she can truly draw the emotion into play, rather than string together a
narration of cold hard facts and numbers. The power of fiction is interestingly
actually hinted at within the novel itself when Dana is reading to Rufus. As
Dana dives into the story of Robinson
Crusoe, she thinks, “As a kind of castaway myself, I was happy to escape
into the fictional world of someone else’s trouble.” The entire scene is covered
in a sense of pleasure on the part of both Dana and Rufus, and they become lost
in a world other than their own, relating to the idea of heterocosms we have
discussed in class. Their enjoyment of Robinson
Crusoe is pretty cool since as I was reading I felt it was a parallel to
how we, as readers, are pulled into the fictional story of Kindred.
The Prologue opens the novel in a distinctive fashion
by jarring the reader with an emotionally and physically painful event. At the
same time, the narrator is in a haze that clears only at the start of The
River, and it is not until then that Dana recognizes/acknowledges our (the
readers) presence. There are high levels of significance in the Prologue
because we are aware of the fact that it is actually the end of events, in
other words, the close to Dana’s story. However, by presenting it at the
beginning, Butler manages to immediately notify readers of the stakes at hand,
and the tensions present. By illustrating a physical injury of Dana, we are
assured that the time travel throughout the novel is not a distant nonrealistic
means of transportation. Instead, it beckons the reader to join the journey of
Dana who is experiencing the time travel in a very active way herself. Consequently,
everything Dana goes through, we go through (to some extent). Butler does a
superb job in using her Prologue to set the mindset of readers for the rest of
the book clearly. So basically her fiction takes full advantage of the
opportunities a fiction provides in creating enhanced experiences and
understanding for the audience.
One of the moments where I really felt the power of
fiction was when Dana was watching Alice’s father getting whipped in the woods
near his cabin. Dana narrates, “I could literally smell his sweat, hear every
ragged breath, hear his cry, every cut of the whip. I could see his body
jerking, convulsing, straining against the rope as his screaming went on and on.”
Such imagery would not be possible in a standard history text, but is used
effectively by Butler. The suspense of the event as Dana is watching from a
hidden location ties in with the mindset Butler offers the reader to take
through the Prologue, and the result is that we feel the heat of the moment with
Dana. Not long after in the passage, Dana stressfully contemplates how she has
never seen anything like what she is seeing at the moment of the whipping, and
even compares her new understanding to her old understanding based on modern
portrayals by television.
In a way, our emotions and perspective on the subject
of the ante bellum South shift as Dana’s understanding shifts. Butler is aware
of this, and ultimately that is a primary reason why Kindred is presented in the form of fiction.
I definitely agree with your ultimate conclusion, that the fictitiousness of the novel, and the fact that Dana is experiencing the ante bellum South in a similar way to us, helps us better connect with the story. However, I wonder about the Robinson Crusoe thing. If Dana is presenting fiction "as a kind of castaway myself, I was happy to escape into the fictional world of someone else’s trouble," Isn't that sort of presenting fiction as escapism? I don't think that's how we're supposed to see Kindred, and honestly, I think it's pretty hard to see it that way. So maybe that is sort of...reminding us not to see Kindred as escapism...or just reminding us of all the ways fiction can be important. I'm not sure.
ReplyDeleteI was just noting the connection between the new world Dana enters by reading Robinson Crusoe and the new world we enter by reading Kindred. I also agree with the clarification you made on my observation, that the new worlds entered serve different purposes, and that they might even contrast each other to show that we shouldn't take Kindred lightly. So I think you can be pretty sure :)
Delete