Reflections

As the course went on, I was continually reminded of my blog title, “Postmodernist Fiction: Blurring the Lines.” I think it was a fitting choice for a title, because we constantly questioned the lines between history and fiction, and the blurring that took place really cleared up a lot by creating intriguing questions. I have always had the questions about how accurate history is, but this class opened my eyes to the reality of contrast in history versus fiction that I had not considered all too much. I was drawn in again and again by the intertwining of both history and fiction in each novel, and that was great to read with an increasingly aware stance of the power of such writing.

All the books this semester were neat to read. Mumbo Jumbo was indeed the least appealing at the start, but I warmed up to it as the novel progressed. Although it was not a page-turner like Kindred, for example, it was so rich in ideas that it was hard not to appreciate. Stylistically I didn’t like the novel, however I gradually enjoyed the novel more and more as time progressed, because there are so many threads and concepts to follow, and it is intellectually stimulating. As a result, I really enjoyed writing the paper for Mumbo Jumbo, and really, all the papers. The class discussions were excellent in delving into subject area regarding the concepts of each novel, and while I did not have a loud voice in class, I definitely enjoyed and gained a lot from each discussion. That is ultimately why I like this class so much, it made me think in  literally everything we did.

Like many people in the class, my favorite novels this semester were Slaughterhouse-Five and Ragtime. They also had a plethora of ideas as well, and they were page-turners at the same time. In all novels that we read, but especially Ragtime, I developed a habit of constantly thinking about what each character represents. It was nice to start the course with Ragtime because it was so clear in demonstrating what a historical fiction looks like – the inexplicable events, inexplicable meetings, symbolic characters, historical characters, fictional yet seemingly historical characters. Since we read it first, I also constantly compared the other novels to Ragtime which for me personally was a fun aspect of the course. During sophomore year, my favorite paper was one where I compared and contrasted two novels we read, it is something I have always been attracted to in literature studies. So I did a lot of that this semester, and I appreciated comments that would arise during class discussions that falls into that category of comparison – whether it was putting specific characters, events or entire novels side by side. I can most definitely say that this course was enjoyable and thought-provoking.

Conspiracy Theories

In today’s panel-presentations, a lot of the discussion revolved around the credibility of stories, conspiracy theories specifically. I certainly agree with the conclusion that as more facts are presented, it ironically creates a less believable narrative. This relationship functions because of the imperfect nature of the world we live in, and the fact that nothing is really going to go exactly as planned. So when an overwhelming number of facts align perfectly together, it alerts any person and shows that the conspiracy theory has reason to be doubted.

In relation to Libra, the potential overly perfect narrative of the JFK assassination is definitely absent, because DeLillo believes that words will never capture the actuality of the moment anyways, and leaves room for interpretation. When it was published, critics initially claimed otherwise by saying that DeLillo is trying to convince of a completely wrong story of events leading to the assassination. However, such critics misunderstood DeLillo entirely, because he himself is aware of the impossibilities in such a task with the unlimited information on the event. DeLillo gives us a novel that has many representations as to what could have happened, which opens up the range of interpretation. For example, his character Raymo is completely fictional, but by including him, DeLillo acknowledges the entire category of people who could have had a major role in the assassination plot but disappeared. Raymo is a representation of all those people.

After class, I was talking with Quyen about the discussion and something pretty interesting happened. I opened up the conversation by talking about the idea of coincidence in the novel and DeLillo’s approach to explaining it, and soon enough she was telling me what was on her mind. She had been thinking of the reason why people search for conspiracy theories. Recently in US History we have learned about the illusion of American Omnipotence, the concept that the US has decided to make everyone’s business their own, feeling that they have the right to do so. Quyen related the US needing to know everything to the individual level of every person who creates conspiracy theories. As she was explaining, I stopped her mid-sentence in an exclamation because I realized a cool phenomenon. I realized that in creating a theory about why people create theories, she was doing exactly what she was explaining. In other words, I proposed to her that she was proving her own point. While she was not necessarily stringing events together and the like, she had a need to know what was going on, and projected a theory upon the matter. It *coincidentally* happened that she was talking about exactly that: placing theories on situations to fulfill intellectual desire. Evidenced by what I saw Quyen doing, we have come to the agreement that it does make sense that the motivation behind conspiracy theorists is related to the idea to have a sense of awareness about information and their implications.

Partly because of the motivation, I have also concluded, as mentioned, that conspiracy theories often times fail to be believable. The desire to be aware of everything inherently lends itself to over supplying information. But DeLillo does manage to quench any feelings of doubt you might expect when opening up Libra for the first time (based on subject of the novel). Even though it is a narrative about the JFK assassination, it is a fiction. Not a history, but a fiction. Returning to the very first ideas of this course, acceptance of Libra is in accord with the idea that fiction has the potential to be more believable than history. In the case of constructing a novel for the events surrounding JFK, I believe that is absolutely true. 

James Bond and the Greater Forces in Life

After the scene where Lee becomes associated with the Fair Play Committee and reunites with David Ferrie, Don DeLillo immediately follows with a passage describing Lee fitting in with the rest of the men involved in the Committee. DeLillo sets up the dynamic between Ferrie/Banister and Lee, and he also describes portions of Lee’s thoughts. Particularly, he focuses on Lee thinking over the multitude of connections between himself and President Kennedy. The connections seem a little odd, forced, and more like actions that Lee takes up just to match Kennnedy. Lee describes the similarity in how both the First Lady and Marina are pregnant, but also how he reads material of Mao just like Kennedy, and how he reads James Bond novels just like Kennedy.

The similarity that Lee thinks of that catches my attention the most is the reading of James Bond novels, because one random fact that I had heard of before watching the documentary and reading Libra is that JFK and his assassin (Oswald) were reading the same James Bond novel the night before the assassination. The cool little addition to Libra of mentioning James Bond novels actually first caught my attention in an earlier scene, when TJ Mackey is searching Lee’s apartment. Mackey needs a sample of Lee’s handwriting so he searches through his apartment, and while he is there, he sees objects that tell of Oswald’s personality. To close the scene, DeLillo writes, “The last thing Mackey saw, leaving the apartment, was a James Bond novel on a table by the door” (180). At the time I read this, I immediately though of the little fact I am familiar with. I also thought of the effectiveness in writing a historical fiction that the sentence entails, because all successful historical fiction novels have infinite background details filling in the setting for the plot and narrative to occur. DeLillo’s inclusion of the Bond novels is, at least on one level, an example of his basic strength in writing historical fiction. I like to note this simply because this idea ties in directly to my thoughts when I was working on the semester project. During those times, I considered the process of writing “good” historical fiction and what it is composed of, and providing little details to fit the time period was something that came to mind. I also recall talking about this sort of support detail as a class when the “walking races” were mentioned. It was suggested that anyone writing about the early 1900s had the freedom to include a detail about those races as a side note, even if it were not the main subject, just to strengthen the short story.

Throughout the novel, DeLillo writes about the idea of coincidence, thereby providing his own reasoning for the overlap of interests between Oswald and Kennedy. Often times, he does so through the voice of David Ferrie. When talking with Tony Astorina at one point, Ferrie says, “We don’t know what to call it, so we say coincidence. It goes deeper…There’s a hidden principle. Every process contains its own outcome. Sometimes we tap in.” Later, Ferrie says to Lee, “Think of two parallel lines…One is the life of Lee H. Oswald. One is the conspiracy to kill the President. What bridges the space between them?...There is a third line…It puts a man on the path of his destiny.” Basically, DeLillo is saying that coincidence is not substantial explanation for anything, and that everything happens with definite reason. The reason may be unknown, but there is some outside force moving it all along. Destiny is created and paths are meant to cross by the direction of this outside force, according to the outside force. Even when Ferrie was talking about other matters, such as the instances from the quotes, he manages to give an explanation of why Lee and Kennedy reading James Bond concurrently is significant.

Just before Lee is described as making the connection between himself and Kennedy, DeLillo describes how Banister’s secretary calls him Leon on accident. Ferrie however picks up the name anyway and uses it after the Marxist Trotsky. DeLillo then writes “Mistakes have this way of finding a sweet meaning.” So directly in the passage regarding the connection Lee and JFK, DeLillo does make indication to the theme that things happen for a reason due to that “hidden principle.”