Semester Project

Click the link:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tIgduqVJjzRy7t7gTK_9Tam2VnG3CNk2KxKxVMP2lOI/edit?usp=sharing

Dana and her role in the 1800s

Throughout the book, we regularly talked about Dana in relation to the events she's witnessing and how that developed. We asked questions, like, what made Dana different from the other slaves? If there wasn't much, did that make her, in essence, a slave herself? How much does her knowledge that she doesn't belong in the 1800s but in the 1970s actually matter? To me, the moment in the final chapter where she kills Rufus in self-defense is the pinnacle of the book, and the development to that point is crucial to understanding it.

When Dana first appears in the 1800s - especially before she knows that she has time traveled - she's more assertive with her beliefs and tries to change the world she's in to fit her - for example, when she tells Rufus plainly that he's not allowed to call her the n-word. When she travels back next, she's with Kevin, which allows them to play-act as master and slave. This, at least, allows Dana to have a sort of barrier between herself and the other slaves - she refers to it as acting a role, but at the end of the day she can go into her room with Kevin and it all fades away. She can still hold onto a sense of individuality, a sense of freedom, a sense that she doesn't belong to anyone. Once she travels back without Kevin, however, she has few choices but to listen to Rufus. She's spent so much more time in the 1800s than the 1970s that the barriers are gone and she is, essentially, Rufus' slave and he her master. However, because of the fact that she knows a different, freer life and that she can travel there, even if it's for a very small amount of time, she is different from the other slaves.

I believe Dana's final action - stabbing Rufus, rather than letting him rape her - was intended by Butler to show what distinguishes her from the other slaves. I don't think she's trying to say Dana is better than them, since she even has Dana critique the idea of the constant criticism of "Uncle Tom"s and "Mammy"s, pointing out the absolute lack of options that slaves faced. In fact, Dana even gets told at one point that one day she'll become a Mammy, and she's criticized by the other slaves for doing all she's told. Butler makes it very clear the hopelessness and absolute lack of options. Dana even attempts escaping to the North but fails. Dana's only real mode of escape is through causing herself pain so much that she's transported back to the 1970s, and that comes with consequences and is only temporary.

And of course, throughout the book many parallels have been drawn between Dana and Alice. Not only do they look so much alike and are called "halves of the same woman" by Rufus, but their situations are rather similar. They're both liked by Rufus, both attempted escape and failed and suffered. The only way Alice is ultimately able to escape slavery is when she kills herself. Similarly, Dana last escaped by slitting her own wrists, and only didn't die because she was able to be transported to the 1970s and given medical attention by Kevin. Alice expressed the desire to kill Rufus rather than let him rape her, like Dana ultimately did. Their difference is the action and the ability to make it. Dana's able to do the action because she has the chance of ultimate escape, unlike every other slave on the plantation, unlike Alice. She knows of a life that isn't slavery and, because of that, is ultimately able to kill Rufus, despite her hesitation. Dana's last action is her grasping on to a freedom the other slaves can't have and won't for years to come - and though it comes with consequences and the loss of a limb forever, she gains it in the end.

Billy Pilgram as a Anti "War Hero" and Slaughterhouse Five as an Anti "War Book"

Even before the first chapter of the novel, Vonnegut makes sure to clearly differentiate his novel from most war novels, by - after assuring the readers of his credentials to tell an accurate account - introducing it as a "novel somewhat in the telegraphic schizophrenic manner of tales of the planet Tralfalmadore, where the flying saucers come from". This sets a theme that continues throughout the book, as real, terrible historical events occur to the paralleling story of sci-fi aliens. Vonnegut's intention is confusing at first - he confirms it's an anti-war book in the first chapter, but has another person question whether it's even possible to write an anti-war book. Additionally, despite these views and him telling his children not to take part in massacres, he creates the character of Billy Pilgram, who seems quite proud of his Green Beret son, to narrate this attempted anti-war mixed with sci-fi novel. However, it becomes clear through the character of Mary O'Hare, to whom the book is dedicated, what the purpose of it is, as Vonnegut realizes that "she thought wars were partly encouraged by books and movies", and he promised her that "There won't be a part for Frank Sinatra or John Wayne", big war action heroes, and names it the Children's Crusade. Slaughterhouse Five is an anti "war novel" novel, against the glorified violence and overly masculine soldiers and overused tropes that make war seem so appealing and action-filled even if it's not their intention, and thus Billy Pilgram is the perfect anti "war hero".

With Billy and the other soldiers, Vonnegut throughout the book makes sure to contradict all the stereotypes of the masculine war action hero that Mary O'Hare so detests. He constantly emphasizes how young and ignorant they are, with the Englishmen especially remarking about how its children fighting the war and not adult men such as themselves. Vonnegut's also constantly ridiculing and undermining any respect Billy might seem to deserve as a soldier. His body is described as weak and pathetic repeatedly. He's constantly dressed weirdly and so sick that he appears in a way that makes him look ridiculous (once even described as a flamingo). Billy's incredibly passive within his story and lacks any heroism, with letting the soldiers take a second shot at him, and constantly telling Weary to leave him behind. Other characters constantly remark how Billy shouldn't be a soldier in the war. However, out of all the characters, he's one of the only one who survives the war. By presenting his protagonist in this way, Vonnegut takes away all glory from war and reveals it to be miserable and absolutely arbitrary when it comes to which lives to spare and which to take.

Additionally, the Tralfalmadorian style - resulting in nonlinear storytelling - removes all sort of suspense that can normally draws people into the action of the novel. In fact, Vonnegut barely describes any actual action at all, instead putting it into a past tense of having it happened, or stating blandly that a character will die in such a manner, so it goes. Most of the novel isn't even confrontations and battles, but dreary life as a war prisoner. The added aspect of aliens additionally makes it impossible for Slaughterhouse Five to be a realistic, gritty thriller, as there's this almost ridiculous element of time travel and flying saucers. By making sure his readers are unable to become invested in the action, Vonnegut successfully avoids for anybody reading the book to be able to glorify war. Vonnegut is very purposeful in both his decisions of writing style and characters to avoid any "war novel" or "war hero" aspect, so that, just as he promised Mary O'Hare, he will avoid contributing to the encouragement of wars.

Women in Mumbo Jumbo

Even prior to our discussion in class about whether Mumbo Jumbo was a womanist text, I was reflecting upon both the few women in Mumbo Jumbo as well as how Reed describes them and their purpose in the text. The conversation from class expanded and complicated my perspective. There's a complex layer to Mumbo Jumbo's depiction of its female characters and their sexuality, and while they contradict the Atonist ideals of chastity and virginity, they also play into harmful, racist, and sexist stereotypes still perpetuating today about black women.

There are three main female characters in Mumbo Jumbo: Charlotte, Earline, and Isis, the goddess from Egyptian mythology. Charlotte is the "sell-out" - she leaves her career with Papa LaBas and works in a theater for a white audience performing in a style reminiscent of minstrel shows. Her role in this show is an overly sexualized woman, played for the laughter of the white audience. Reed is obviously critical of this, his tone laced with cutting sarcasm as he describes the scene. This would imply that he seeks to critique the historic depiction by white people of black people (especially black women) as this type of character. However, his later depictions fail to reach beyond this. Isis' only real appearance in the long retelling of the mythology is when she's having sex, and is barely described or even mentioned besides this. Earline is the most prominent of the female characters in this book, and she gets possessed with the loa Erzulie, and then seduces the bus driver as well as attempts to seduce other male characters in the book. It's implied that the only way to remove the loa from her was then through sexual actions with Black Herman. This brings up the dicy issue of consent - could Earline in any possible way have consented to this when she was literally possessed at the time?

Perhaps if the characters had more depth these sexual depictions would be less of a problem - however, all the female characters play a very small role in the story. None of the woman are involved directly in the main plot of stopping Hinckle Von Vampton, or in spreading Jes Grew - in fact, they are the doubters. Their only moments of significance is always related to sex - Charlotte does get to attempt to try to trick and stop Biff Musclewhite, but does this by using her 'feminine' charms and seduces him - she's unsuccessful, as well, and gets violently murdered at his hands for her effort. Even Earline's genuine, emotional speech at the end of the book about believing in Jes Grew now was still a direct product of her possession by Erzulie.

The author of the article arguing that Mumbo Jumbo was womanist gave a good case - it is definitely very grounded within Atonism to be repressive of sexuality and therefore of women, and Reed's female characters are much more sexual than Atonist literature would allow female characters to be. However, it is not empowering in the context of the Atonist stereotype historically used to demean black women specifically, especially with the lack of any character building or moments unrelated to sex.

Coalhouse Walker Jr as a Historical Figure in Ragtime

One of the most interesting facets about this book is how Doctorow plays with history, as we often discussed in class. Not only does he place historical figures into a fictional narrative, expressing thoughts, actions, and conversations the characters have with no proof of them having happened in history or how, if they did, the information coul've possibly gone to Doctorow, but he also completely disrupts the flow and known, exact facts of history that he had been so careful to stick to before that point. By having his fictional character of Coalhouse Walker Jr catch the attention of the nation with violent acts of revolution and protest, Doctorow in fact creates a historical character that never lived in the era of Ragtime -- but could've.

The first half of the book seems to pertain almost completely to the retelling of the various stories of the historical figures, with Evelyn Nesbitt, Emma Goldman, Houdini, and others leading the plot. The two fictional families - Mother, Father, Mother's Younger Brother and the little boy along with Tateh and his daughter - appear less often, and when they do it is often because their story intertwines with one of the historical characters. This all changes with the appearance of Coalhouse Walker Jr. Notably, he the first named fictional character, and the focus of the novel quickly shifts to him, with now only small interludes from the historical figures we had previously heard so much about, and usually in relation to his story.

At first, Coalhouse is treated with some distance, but rather similarly to the other fictional characters. Doctorow never quite enters his full perspective, with few - if any - direct thoughts from him, but his story does get followed. It is after the Fire Chief destroys his car and sets in motion the series of events to Coalhouse's death that Doctorow begins to treat him like a historical figure. Using phrases such as "It is known" and by stating "even at this date we can't condone the mayhem done in his cause but it is important to know the truth insofar as that is possible" implies Doctorow doesn't know the full truth (despite Coalhouse being a character of his creation) and that these events that take place are known fact. Additionally, once Younger Brother joins Coalhouse's cause, he's given similar treatment. Despite us having gotten full perspective from Younger Brother before, he now vanishes from us, and Doctorow tell us all the information he knows and is reporting to us comes from Younger Brother's diaries from the time of these events.

As the historical characters that loomed over the first novel fade to the background, the climax of the story revolves around the consequential actions of Coalhouse Walker Jr and the two fictional families. Doctorow breaks all the "rules" by having Coalhouse's actions widely reported on, something that one wouldn't be able to miss if looking up historical accounts of the era. Within the novel, however, Doctorow treats him as the only true historical figure, addressing sources of information for his actions and thoughts with efforts he didn't provide for the real historical figures in the story. Therefore, Coalhouse becomes a fictional historical figure.

The Perspective of The Little Boy

In the very beginning of class, we discussed Doctorow as a narrator, and the possibility of whether he could possibly be the little boy or, at least, shared his perspective and spoke through him came up. Ever since then, I've been paying attention to the little boy in the chapters so far - specifically, when the perspective of the story shifts to him and what he does when this happens.

This book is full of changing and shifting perspectives, so much that it can be hard to figure out whose thoughts Doctorow is speaking from or who the story is being told from. For example, in the chapter where Goldman and Evelyn Nesbit meet, the shape of narration was influenced by Younger Brother's perspective, even though the audience (or at least, I did) most likely forgot that he was even there until the end of the chapter. I think Doctorow is very clever and purposeful when he chooses who he tells the story through, which is why I payed attention to these moments.

The first time we see the little boy is in the very first chapter, when he is still quite young. He's obsessed with Harry Houdini -- and Doctorow uses this opportunity to introduce Houdini to the story, as right after we hear about the little boy's fascination with the escape artist, Houdini crashes into the telephone pole outside of their house, the boy the only witness to the event. The chapter ends with the boy telling Houdini to "warn the duke" -- seeming to know Houdini would meet Franz Ferdinand as well as the assassination of the duke that started World War 1.

The next time we get the little boy's perspective is when Mother finds the little baby in the garden. It switches from Mother's narration, listing her various worries, to her son observing her as she discovers the baby. It's an interesting choice to have his perspective throughout this scene, that would've naturally fit into Mother's perspective as the discoverer, but until the scene is over and the doctor and police leave, the boy follows the action around in a narration marked with small, factual observations. Just as with Houdini, the boy seems to intuitively know when major events for his family are happening - after all, the discovery of this baby leads to a path that brings Coalhouse Walker into the life of the family. By choosing to show this through the point of the boy, Doctorow cements the character's importance and draws attention to his peculiarities. So far, the boy has already shown signs of an almost supernatural and definitely strange understanding of the world.

This is accented by his next appearance, when he's a bit older. The book describes him watching things and causing it to move, and staring at the mirror until he became two people in it. Additionally, he's fascinated by the discarded, constantly collecting it, such as Tateh's silhouettes. Even Mother notes that he seems odd and it worries her. Perhaps what most stuck out to me was the end of chapter fifteen ends with "the boy's eyes saw only the tracks made by the skaters, traces quickly erased of moments past, journeys taken". The little boy seems to be out of touch with reality, seeing pasts and presents. While I can't predict where Doctorow will take the boy in the rest of the book, I am certain he is setting something up with him and his abilities, and the points where the book take the son's perspective are major moments that intrigue me and, I predict, will continue to do so.

Toxic Masculinity in Sag Harbour

Benji's surrounded by almost exclusively male characters in this novel, and being a growing teenage boy growing up in 1980s America, masculinity is commonly considered an incredibly important part of growing up. Benji describes how they used to get into fights constantly as children, and the word "pussy" is thrown around by the other boys commonly to undermine each other's masculine status. The few female characters who do exist are almost always treated by the boys as sex objects. In general, I felt very taken aback at multiple parts of the book by the sheer bluntness of the boys as they discussed girls.

I was also taken aback by how determined the boys seemed to be in embracing typically masculine things. I already mentioned the fights they got into as children, and in the chapter Gangsters, Benji notes that it transitions into guns. Benji seems a bit hesitant about how much his friends are embracing their guns. It's also useful to note that they're mainly posing with their guns - it's completely about looking good, looking masculine, proving themselves to each other.

I think the intensity of the grabbing onto masculinity is directly linked to Benji and his friends' struggling with their identity. The boys are, as Benji once describes them, a walking contradiction - black boys with beach houses. Ben often notes how Benji, and the others, are steeped in insecurity. They're all faking it, and just trying to figure out themselves. Benji also notes how his friends differently embrace their blackness. The time period is key here. (Excuse Nika as she goes into full out history nerd). As we juniors learned this year in Mr. Leff's class, the social movements of the 60s and 70s brought along the Black Power and Black Panther movement. I think the influence of the movements plays a key part in Benji's life in main ways, but for the sake of this blog post, I'm going to focus on the embracing of masculinity within the movement. Masculinity was considered a key part of regaining power for black people, and so it was embraced by many within the movement and became a key part of the rhetoric, alienating some women from the movement. Another crucial part of the Black Panther movement was that they armed themselves with guns. When reading the chapter the Gangsters, I immediately began to think about how Benji's friend's newfound fascination and attachment to guns had not only to do with masculinity, but also with their race, and how insecure/confused they felt about both of those elements and their identity at this point in their lives.

Benji shows throughout the book that he never felt as comfortable with the intense masculinity his friends seemed to be adopting, but he too - and he admits that it seems strange to him now, as well - often got into fights as a child, and he often goes along with what his friends do. I think it's also key that the main encourager of Benji's fights as a child, his father, lived through the time of the Black Panthers and likely took the ideas of masculinity to a new extreme - his father taught Benji to fight in an aggressive manner we even described as abusive in class. Benji also finds earlier in the book a piece of paper on which his mother describes his father as abuse. Abuse is all about power, just as toxic masculinity is, and they often feed into each other.

Toxic masculinity is a huge part of this book and Benji is deeply rooted in an environment at Sag Harbour that encourages it through historical context, his father's role in his life, and the influence and lead of his friends around him.