Thursday, August 2, 2007

The novel has definately taken a much more sinister turn than I initially expected, but I believe it is admirable that it is depicting slavery in what seems to be an accurate way. Dana's assimilation into the Weylin plantation is disturbing to say the least. While Dana claims that "we were simply actors", it appears, especially after the beating and subsequent enslavement, that the "acting" has stopped. The scenes of brutality are especially hard to read, and it is hard to imagine that humans are capable of such atrocities. Dana's comparison of the slave plantation to Nazi Germany is particulary fitting.
Rufus' character developemnt is interesti0ng because, while he has been influenced by Dana, he is much more influenced by the ways of his time. The fact that he is now capable of rape, and that the laws of his time don't punish him, only seems to fuel his tendency to become more like his father. Ironically Dana's very existence depends on the crimes that Rufus inflicts on Alice. Dana seems more and more hardened as time goes on, even to the point she believes herself capable of murder (something she has yet to attempt despite the hardships she faces at the hands of the Weylins). The scene where she goes to tell Alice that she must go to Rufus that night is disturbing, because Dana seems to inform Alice of what she must do with a "determined calm". She realizes that her very existence depends on their "relationship" and therefore she knows what she must do, but it is still hard to imagine allowing Alice to relive her rape again. It will be interesting to see Dana's character continue to develop. The novel as a whole is disturbing, but it tells a gripping story.

10 comments:

hermance said...

Quentin, thanks for your comments. It seems that many of you find Rufus an intriguing, albeit puzzling and somewhat repulsive, character. I did, as well. I'd be interested in hearing more about what you all think makes him so compelling.

I also take your point, Quentin, that the novel becomes more sinister. Does anyone have any sense of why Butler might do this? Also, what do you think seems "authentic" about the way Dana portrays the slave system?

Anyone?

Micah Moore said...

I think Rufus is so compelling because he is the only vile character in the book who we have hope for. He is capable of change, regardless of whether or not he ever does. Rather than being simply a "good guy" or a "bad guy," he exists as a potentially amorphous character with the capacity to become one or the other.

hermance said...

Micah, I think that is a really interesting--and clarifying--perspective on Rufus. Do you think his father would have been capable of change too when he was a boy? Or do you think Dana is what helps Rufus be capable of change (or maintain his capacity for change longer than most in the antebellum South)?

I guess what I'm asking is that do you think it is something about being young that makes people capable of change (or makes them amorphous, as you put it)? Or is it something unique to Rufus--and if so, what is it?

These questions are open to all, of course, so please feel free to chime in!

Micah Moore said...

I think kids are products of what is around them, so with Rufus being exposed to Dana at a young age, he has a better chance of becoming good than his father did when he was a child, since his father probably had no positive influences.

hermance said...

Couldn't interactions with other slaves be positive influences? The most obvious example I can think of here is the mammy stereotype--the dutiful slave "mother" who dotes on the masters' children? Why would that kind of influence be different than Dana's on Rufus?

Micah Moore said...

I guess you're right. I was being too much of a rationalist, trying to avoid the idea of some mystical force working in Rufus, but the whole book is based off of ideas like that, so I should probably just embrace it.

Lauren said...

“He has a better chance of becoming good”
“Good” by whose standards? We can look at their lifestyles and judge that the brutality of slavery was irrational. But in the 1800’s wasn’t it socially expected of a middle class white man. Didn’t the mammy refer to the kid in her care as master? I don’t believe the characters chose to be good or bad, they made choices, but their outlook on slavery was cultured into them.

Micah Moore said...

"I don't believe the characters chose to be good or bad..."

All I am saying is that Rufus was the most likely to have the capacity to choose. If he wasn't, so many people wouldn't have had so many wishful thoughts.

Lauren said...

"so many people wouldn't have had so many wishful thoughts."

Are you talking about Dana?

Micah Moore said...

Ah, I apologize for not being clear.

I was mainly referring to the posted reactions on this blog and how most of the people who have posted seemed to have had hope for Rufus.