Butler and the 1619 Project
I was doing a little bit of outside reading on the background of the book and I was struck at the reason why Butler decided to write this. A young African American man told her that he was ashamed of his ancestors and their subservience and wishes he could kill them. She wrote the book to illustrate how someone from the future would have done the same. We touched on this a little bit in class by looking at the loss of her sense of self over the course of the book and how we agreed we would probably have done the same in her position so this motive makes a lot of sense.
I just think this outlook is so foreign to me. In school we were always taught about the subtle forms of resistance that slaves performed to rebel against the owners like intentionally breaking things or doing their tasks slowly. The teachings of slavery before this was that they were all submissive and allowed themselves to be subjugated. In fact, this was a time when a lot of people didn’t even want to teach about slavery because we were “past that.”
This book was on the forefront of these teachings that show the brutality and abuse of the system. It also illustrates why modern people would not have been able to act any differently. It teaches black history and the broader American history in a new light that a lot of people had never thought about before in the ‘70s
It made me think back to the 1619 project and the backlash it received. Teaching black history in another way that white people push back on because it might make them “feel uncomfortable.” These ideas and change in thinking feel very similar to the new ideas that Butler and many others were bringing to the public fifty years ago. I think we may be seeing another wave of change in the curriculum of America that may be commonplace in a few generations. There might be kids looking back to 2022 and finding in foreign to not understand critical race theory as it pertains to America.
It just made me realize that there is always progress that can be made to shine light on the understandings that the American public, myself included, have about black history. The narrative continues to change and it gives a lot of credence to the ideas of this class that history is fiction and can be whatever we want. America still has to decide what they want black history to be today.
Wow, that story about why Octavia Butler decided to write Kindred is really interesting, and it explains a lot about the contents and messaging of the story. One of the main themes in Kindred is how easy it is to get used to slavery and submission in order to stay alive and live the best possible life one can under their circumstances. This idea that people living in slavery were meek and spineless is a very ignorant standpoint, because it fails to recognize the system of intense oppression these people were living under, and how it was virtually impossible to break out of it without participating in it. I love your points here, great post.
ReplyDeleteThat story surprises me a lot. I don't see how you could see being enslaved as a moral failing. Even if slaves HAD "allowed themselves to be subjugated" could you blame them for being terrified? I think that the nuance that this book portrays slavery with is particularly striking with this context in mind.
ReplyDeleteOh wow I didn't know that about the origin of the book, that's very interesting. I think, though, that Dana lashing out at the field workers and saying that they allowed themselves to be enslaved and sent to work, might be a similar sort of frustration - of feeling powerless and weak and therefore lashing out at others. It's an interesting mindset that she enters there during that argument.
ReplyDeleteI really should remember to mention that origin story for this novel at the start of our discussions--it really does help frame some of the book's concerns in a direct way. I think specifically of the moment where Dana straight-up uses the phrase when she talks to Sam about how they "let Fowler drive them to the fields every day" (237). Sam objects, of course, but then Dana clarifies that they ALL are "letting themselves" submit to the system because the cost of resistance is too high: "They do it to keep the skin on their backs and the breath in their bodies." The novel as a whole can be seen as Dana learning what it means to "let herself" submit to such a system, despite all of the assets that would seem to make her more immune, as a 20th century person. But in order to *survive* she must embody the role. She must "let herself" be ordered around by Margaret. Butler seems to be suggesting (to this young man) that he, too, would likely do the same. And this directs our focus to the *system* and not just the individuals who make what Kanye West once controversially described as a "choice."
ReplyDeleteI'm also surprised to find out that this is the origin of the book. I really liked this book as an example of history as fiction simply because of how effective of a rebuttal it is to that man's sentiment. There are more than enough examples of life as a slave, or simply life as a black person during this time in the book that speak for themselves on this topic.
ReplyDeleteWow, that's interesting and certainly puts the book more in context. In the book we definitely see how enslaved people sometimes manage small acts of resistance, but do so against incredible odds. And the ease with which someone can be taught to accept subservience (or generally how someone is affected strongly by their environment and social norms) is a huge theme throughout the book.
ReplyDeleteI think understanding the circumstances of the past can also help use understand those of the present, like how people perpetuating harmful systems (like slavery) often can't see how harmful those systems are for what ever reason. Teaching critical race theory exposes those harms, and may make people uncomfortable because they don't want to face the magnitude of harm that is still occurring in this country. Great post!
ReplyDelete