Reflecting on the end of Kindred

           When I read the end of Kindred, I found myself strangely surprised. Did I really not think Dana would eventually kill Rufus? To be honest, I didn’t think she would actually do it, but I suppose it is the only way we can know that Dana is through with her time travel. I would expect the scene to be brutal and violent, but it was actually quite subdued. Right before Dana kills Rufus she describes that they were laying together “with his head on my shoulder, his left arm around me, his right hand still holding my hand” (259). The scene almost feels peaceful, and Dana momentarily contemplates giving in to Rufus. After all, he was preparing to rape her. She notices that “he was not hurting me, would not hurt me if I remained as I was” and almost convinces herself to give in. But then she stops herself mid thought, and kills Rufus.

            The mixed emotions and thoughts in this scene really tie in to the rest of the story. Rufus and Dana seem to fall into a cycle of wrongdoing on Rufus’ part and forgiveness on Dana’s part, and the end shows the limit to Dana’s forgiveness. She knows she will not forgive Rufus—or more importantly herself—if she lets Rufus rape her. She says of Rufus just before killing him that he is “erratic, alternately generous and vicious” she notes that she “could accept him as my ancestor, my younger brother, my friend, but not as my master, and not as my lover” (260). Dana put up with a lot of abuse from Rufus, and even developed a strange caring relationship with him, but she retains her power over herself in the end by putting limits on their relationship. While I don’t believe that murder is usually the right answer, here it brought a natural close to the novel. Sure, Butler could have just had Dana hurt Rufus enough to get away from him, but that is not really a realistic outcome given the context of the situation.

            When I first read the part where Dana gets her arm stuck in the wall on her last travel through time I thought it was a very strange thing to end the novel with. But the more I think about it, the more sense it makes in the story. When Dana went back to 1976, Rufus’ hand was still gripping Dana’s arm in the same spot that was stuck in the wall in 1976. Dana loses part of her arm in the incident, which is symbolic to her losing a part of herself in the past. I think the reason Dana’s arm gets stuck in a wall and not something else is because walls are natural and mostly permanent dividers. The wall represents the division between the past and the present, which Dana was stuck between throughout the novel, and in the end she is finally able to break free and remain on one side of the wall. She loses a part of herself in the past, but gains an understanding of her history that she could get in no other way.

            I really enjoyed Kindred by Octavia E. Butler, and found it complex and fascinating. The ending first perplexed me, but now I think I see why it ended in the way it did, and find it to be a good conclusion point for the story. It doesn’t sum everything up perfectly in terms of themes, but is a good conclusion to the plot.

 

Works Cited

Butler, Octavia E. Kindred. Boston, Massachusettes; Beacon Press, 2003. Print.

Domestic Violence

An issue discussed in class about Octavia E. Butler's novel, “Kindred” dealt with domestic violence. A thought that was brought up was domestic violence, and how domestic violence is usually between two lovers; the dictionary definition of domestic violence is, “violence or physical abuse directed toward your spouse or domestic partner; usually violence by men against women.” In just the prologue, Dana's husband, Kevin, was accused of putting Dana through hell and back when she lost her arm, “They began asking me about Kevin. Their words seemed to blur together at first, and I paid little attention. After a while, though, I replayed them and suddenly realized that these men were trying to blame Kevin for “hurting” my arm”(10). This should not always be the case, because as discussed in class, domestic violence could be other people you are extremely close to. Family members, or in this case slaves could suffer from domestic violence from whoever is viewed as the “dominant” one, or the “alpha male.”

This violence really puts an affect on everyone's lives, slaves or not. Rufus definitely suffers from domestic violence when it comes to his father. A quotation I felt is really important is, “The boy already knew more about revenge than I did. What kind of man was he going to grow up into?” This in my opinion is important because in this scene Rufus was brutally beat by Weylin all because Rufus stole a dollar. You know, in our world today, and in Dana's actual world, this is not something to be harmed over. The outcome of this is not only shocking for the reader, but for Dana as well, because Rufus ends up starting a fire and lashing out due to the domestic violence. 

A Perplexing Prologue

The beginning of any story is very significant. It is in the beginnings that the characters are introduced, the setting is established, and the story begins to evolve. However, on occasion, writers decide to initiate the beginning of a story with a prologue. In these prologues, we the readers are often put into a disoriented and perplexing scene that we must determine for ourselves. Octavia Butler does just this in her novel Kindred, a story about the modern black woman Dana, who travels through time and space to a plantation in 1815. The story itself is quite fascinating; however, it was the prologue that really caught my attention.

The first sentence, “I lost an arm on my last trip home” (9), automatically raises the questions who, what, where, when, why, and ultimately draws the reader in to disorientation to try and discover what is going on. The narrator, whose identity we do not yet know, goes on to explain that she had lost a year of her life, along with “much of the comfort and security” she had not cherished until it was gone (9). Right off the bat, Butler places us into this mystifying situation, in the middle of an obviously tragic situation. This technique, however, foreshadows feelings that must arise later in the text.

As we soon discover, Dana is an odd case of time travel; disappearing from her modern home, she travels back in time to the 1800’s slave era. Because she drops us right in to the story, Butler gives us a glimpse of how Dana must feel; disoriented, confused, and attempting to find out what exactly is happening. Upon further reading, however, we do come to discover Dana’s story, understanding her strange ability to travel back in time to help her ancestors and see what life was really like during the slave era. As we read, though, we must keep in mind this perplexing prologue because, when reread, we come to understand that Dana will eventually be placed in such a dangerous situation while time traveling that she loses her arm. We can then infer that the more she goes back in time, the more dangerous it gets and the more risks she will have to take. The prologue ends with Dana’s husband telling her that he does not know and Dana responding, “Neither do I… Neither do I” (11). Ultimately, Butler is placing us in the position that Dana is in, one of complete disorientation.

Unique Perspective

            So far, I am really enjoying Kindred by Octavia Butler. The story is really interesting, and it gives a new perspective on slavery that I have not read before. The narrator Dana travels through time to experience slavery, and because it is not her natural surroundings, she is able to give a more understandable perspective to her readers, who have also not experienced slavery first-hand. She realizes that without experiencing it we cannot truly comprehend the situation, as demonstrated by Dana when she is describing her first experience with slavery to her husband: “most of the people around Rufus know more about real violence than the screenwriters of today will ever know” (Butler 48). By “the people around Rufus,” Dana is referring to the people she saw on Rufus’ father’s plantation in 1815 who live controlled by the institution of slavery, and “the screenwriters of today” are people who think they understand situations like slavery that they have not experienced, and who she now knows will never have as good of an understanding of the violence of slavery as the people who lived it.

In her attempts to show the reader a time which she knows they will not fully comprehend, Butler’s story keeps reminding me of Cynthia Ozick’s “The Shawl,” where Ozick uses a unique tone and style to present to the readers an experience that she knows they will never truly understand. Ozick uses strange metaphors, and a unique writing style that attempts to put the reader in the situation of her characters by omitting basic information and providing details in unexpected language and ways, to help bridge the translation gap between those who know what it is like to experience a concentration camp, and those who do not. Butler tries to bridge this gap by telling her readers straight-up that her narrator Dana, even though she is well educated on the history of slavery, was shocked by the reality of slavery. By telling us this, Butler is showing us that we might not understand slavery as the people who lived it do, but we can still try to sympathize with and comprehend the violence and fear provoked by slavery.

One thing I find interesting about these two stories is that neither of the narrators experienced first-hand the time and situation that they are expressing to us through their narratives. Perhaps they are showing humility, in saying that even though they are writing about a certain time period and know a lot about it, they realize that it is impossible for them to understand it as well as the people who lived it. And perhaps they are hoping to instill humility in the readers, showing that they may have read and learned a lot about something, but they should not assume that they know what it is like to experience things like being held in a concentration camp, or being a slave.

Whatever the reason for writing the stories this way, I think they were both affective in portraying a certain time period with enough detail and information for me to understand the situation, without me thinking that I know what it is like to live in the situation. I have enjoyed both of these stories, and I appreciate the unique perspective both of the authors brought to their respective time periods.

Butler, Octavia E. Kindred. Boston, Massachusettes; Beacon Press, 2003. Print.