Wednesday, March 28, 2018

My Predictions for Kindred

So, we just started reading Kindred, and in honor of this conventionally straightforward narrative, I decided I would write a blog post on my predictions for how the plot will continue.  

The "main character," Dana, seems to be the center of the plot so far, which seems to be focused around her time travel from the 1970s to the 1800s. My first prediction concerns the prologue. Dana's arm has just been amputated and she and Kevin are extremely vague about why. It has still not been explicitly explained, which makes sense, considering the scene in the prologue usually occurs at the climax or end of the novel, but nonetheless, I believe there is a fairly simple explanation for why the amputation was necessary. Following the prologue, we are introduced to Dana's time travel. Through the narrative, the reader can figure out that when Dana time travels, if she moves from place to place while in the past, she will also move from place to place in the present (recall how she disappears and appears a few feet away the first time she goes back in time). Because of this example, I believe that Dana's arm having been "crushed right into the wall" was caused by her returning to the present close enough to a wall that her arm got stuck. And, as we all know, it is quite difficult to safely remove an arm from a wall, so it is necessary to amputate it instead.  

Now, you might be saying, "well, okay Lia, but this is really very simple and we all already thought of that. Do you have anything a little more exciting for us?" The answer, is yes. I have an astronomically more insane prediction to share with you. Now, I will admit that I am skeptical as to the likeliness of it coming true, but nonetheless I did say I was going to share my predictions for the continuation of the plot, so I will.  

Similarly to the first one, this prediction is directly related to the prologue. As Adi pointed out in our discussion yesterday, this novel seems a little more modern than what we have been reading so far this semester. It has the style and suspense of a detective novel and a simple narrative style that I associate with novels I would not expect to see in this class. So, in order to post-modernize (or maybe just anti-modernize, I still don't really get the differences) this novel a bit, I predict that not only will the prologue not be the end of the novel (some people were saying that yesterday), but it won't even be the climax of the novel. It will simply not happen. Generally, a prologue is either something that has happened years previously, or a flash forward to the most important or exciting part of the novel. Not only would not including the prologue later in the novel separate this novel from most modern novels, but it would also bring about the possibility that the prologue is a possible ending or a possible climax. This implies that the time travel in Kindred is the sort of time travel where Dana can change the future. The prologue that Butler includes is (well, could be) just one possible future, but it is not necessarily the only possibility. 

Saturday, March 10, 2018

Doctor Who and Slaughterhouse-Five

Starting at the very beginning of the novel, on the title page, Vonnegut confused me with seemingly sensible sentences about “the planet Tralfamadore, where the flying saucers come from.” It is not until page 32 (of the big brown version) that Vonnegut decided it was about time to inform us that Billy had, as a matter of fact, “been kidnapped by a flying saucer [from Tralfamadore] in 1967.” Then, on the next few pages, Billy reveals that his writing style/thought process is an attempt to mimic the thought process of the Tralfamadorians.

Now, I could write this blog post as an analysis/listing of all of the Tralfamadorian ideas displayed in this novel so far, but before we get to that (if we do) I would like to explain to you how Billy’s kidnapping by the Tralfamadorians is basically Doctor Who.

For those who don’t know, Doctor Who is a British TV show that has been airing since 1963. It follows the timeline of the Doctor, a Time Lord from a planet called Gallifrey who travels through time and space in his TARDIS. Throughout the show, he dies and is regenerated multiple times. For this post, I would like to focus on the Eleventh Doctor, played by Matt Smith. One of the Eleventh Doctor’s companions (people/humans who travel with him) is Amy (Amelia) Pond, often accompanied by her husband, Rory.

On Rory and Amy’s wedding anniversary (Season 7 episode 4: “The Power of Three”) the Doctor shows up, whisks Amy and Rory into his police box TARDIS, and then they leave. The episode shows how they go from time to time (at one point Amy accidentally marries Henry the 8th; he’s the one who had six wives; if you want to watch, here’s a song about him: https://www.schooltube.com/video/123d1074578941487a5f/HORRIBLE%20HISTORIES%20-%20The%20Wives%20of%20Henry%20VIII%20(Terrible%20Tudors) ) and then at the end of it they return back to the anniversary party just a few seconds after they left. However, when Rory’s father (played by the same actor who played Arthur Weasley) questions the Doctor, he admits they have actually been gone for seven weeks.

There are a few connections to be made between this episode of Doctor Who and Slaughterhouse-Five the most obvious being that no one notices that the Ponds or Billy have left. As Billy describes, “the Tralfamadorians had taken him through a time warp, so that he could be on Tralfamadore for years, and still be away from Earth for only a microsecond” (32-33).

The other two connections are smaller and more ironic than significant. The first is that Billy leaves the night of his daughter’s wedding and Rory and Amy leave during their anniversary party. Both instances are connected to weddings. The second connection is that, while away, both Amy and Billy enter into a new relationship with someone living in the place they are visiting. With Amy, it is, as previously stated, King Henry VIII, and with Billy, it is Montana Wildhack, a “former Earthling movie star” who he mates with while on Tralfamadore (32).

It would be cool to find out if these are related at all; like if one stole the idea from the other (the TV show came out first, so the idea of travel through time and space wasn’t new, but this episode didn’t air until 2012), but since that is not possible, in conclusion, I would just like to mention one thing that connects both the TV show Doctor Who as a whole and the novel Slaughterhouse-Five. Both main characters, the Doctor and Billy, are involved in a war. For the Doctor, it is the Time War, where all of the Time Lords (and Ladies) other than himself (and the Master/Missy) die, and for Billy, it is World War II. These wars seem to define the characters of both these “men” (the newest Doctor is a woman) and push them into the actions portrayed in the novel/show (Billy would never have written the novel if he hadn’t been in the war; the Doctor basically becomes the Doctor because of the war).


Any Whovians out there, do you agree? Also, on a completely different note, can anyone explain to me how the War Doctor is not the First Doctor? I haven’t seen the original series so that stuff trips me up. Thanks!

Friday, March 2, 2018

Gender in Mumbo Jumbo

Though we have discussed race in relation to Mumbo Jumbo in class, I realized today that we never talked about gender. So, what? It’s not a big deal, we don’t have to talk about sexism in relation to every book that we read. It was a simple observation.

But then, that observation dug into my mind, and I realized, that in the entire book, I could only think of two named, relatively consequential, female characters: Earline and Charlotte. And, even with those two, they didn’t seem to have a very large part in the story. The two are second to pro-Jes Grew, fairly prominent black men, with Earline as Papa LaBas’ assistant and Charlotte doing things for Berbelang. 

Think about it: both Earline and Charlotte seem involved with Jes Grew and its spread, yet (as far as I can remember) Earline is mentioned only in regard to the Mumbo Jumbo Kathedral and her possession by a loa, and Charlotte is mentioned only in regard to the Mumbo Jumbo Kathedral, her involvement in plays of some sort, and her murder by Musclewhite. 

Charlotte’s lack of a presence seems fairly realistic to me, though I question why she wasn’t involved with the mutafikah alongside Berbelang, but what seems extremely odd is Earline’s lack of involvement. She enters the story momentarily at the beginning of the novel and then disappears for a while, reappears to have sex with a married man, get a loa separated from her, and then disappear again. Why is she not involved in LaBas’ movements? 

It is, of course, possible that Earline is completely oblivious to the surrounding conflict of Jes Grew versus the Atonists, but that seems unlikely. As Papa LaBas’ assistant, one might imagine that Earline would be by LaBas’ side (at times other than when he is at a party), but instead, he is trailed by Black Herman and/or T Malice, two black men who also seem to be involved with the Kathedral.

So, why are these women kicked to the background? Well, at least in the party scene 159, it seems to me that Earline (Charlotte is dead at this point) is excluded because she is a woman: weak and unable to handle to horrors of disrupting a party. Another woman mentioned in the scene, the Hostess, pushes this stereotype by fainting not once, but twice. 

Ok, so maybe the men in the story feel that Earline is too feminine for their work, but why would Reed write his female characters like this in his novel? This is something which, despite extensive thought, I have been unable to find a reason for. It baffles me, because, as we have discussed in class, he is specifically reversing the roles of black and white cultures in terms of superiority and writing white characters like white people wrote black characters in order to make a point about oppression. Why would he ignore the struggle of women, black and white? From what we know about him as an author, it doesn’t seem like something he would purposefully skip over. Like I said, I’m not really sure. Maybe he just didn’t want ideas about sexism to disrupt his overall message about racism or something like that. Who knows. 


Honestly, does anyone have any ideas? It’s hard to base anything off of anything on this topic, seeing as there are very few female characters to study, but I’m sure one of you brilliant minds can think of something other than what I have hypothesized above. 



Note: Here’s the link to a song that made up of words from Mumbo Jumbo that I found on YouTube. It’s sort of jazzy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pjdRgzW90E