Is Butler's "Kindred" fodder for the 1776 project?

This post is riffing off of a comment I made on Leor's post, "Kevin Character Analysis". See here:

https://leorblogsplot.blogspot.com/2023/11/kevin-character-analysis.html?sc=1700454447766#c6292752440283883920

My original comment:

You went all in on the idea of Kevin as a student learning about the 1619 project. That's definitely a meaningful way to analyze it. Although neither Kevin or Dana spend any time in 1619, they do get a hands-on learning experience of 1800s institutionalized slavery. Both Kevin and Dana return to the present scarred, physically and mentally, and will never truly recover from their experience time traveling. It occurred to me that this could be used to argue that the 1619 project is a harmful way of teaching kids about American history (not my actual opinion, but an interesting question to unpack and debate about). Of course, it's essential to not censor history in any form, and it's important to face uncomfortable truths. That might be something this book is getting at with Dana's inexplicable time travelling to the past-- that you can't ignore history.

Continued argument:

Is Butler's Kindred fodder for the 1776 project? Can it be used to argue that teaching kids about the 1619 project is harmful for their emotional well-being? The main reason some people don't like the 1619 project is that it "vilifies our founders", teaches kids to hate their country and dispels patriotism. It can be inferred that most people who are worried about the 1619 project are white conservatives who want to preserve their patriotic view on America. The fact that America was founded on slavery creates cognitive dissonance in the minds of these people, leading them to regard slavery as an unfortunate "blip" in America's history-- an outlier in our otherwise "grand" narrative. And they worry that "overstating" slavery as we teach American history to their children will cause them unnecessary strife. Slavery ended in 1865, right? We shouldn't be opening up old wounds; the last thing this country needs is to be further divided.

You could potentially support this argument using Kevin and Dana's experiences in the past. They both come out of the experience traumatized. Kevin, after spending 5 years alone in the 1800s, becomes hardened and frustrated when he returns to the present. He is confused by traffic and driving, returning from an outing with his hands shaking (244). Dana's time in the past is much more traumatic and scarring, both physically and mentally. She returns to the present with a scarred back and a missing arm. Using the analogy that Kevin and Dana represent students learning about American history, you could say that their learning experience traumatized them. If you really cherry-picked it, you could make a pro-1776 project statement. Given the nature of the 1776 project, I would expect nothing less.

However, I think it's stupid to use this book to make a pro-1776 argument. While slavery may be an uncomfortable fact to face, it nonetheless happened and we can't glaze over that. It's important to face uncomfortable truths, in both history and ourselves. I think the reason behind Dana's inexplicable teleportation to the past is that for her, she has to understand her heritage, and by forcing her to live history, the book accomplishes that goal. After understanding her heritage, part of her is literally left in the past, but she returns to the present more knowledgeable about her ancestry. Kevin is dragged along by Dana, and at first he doesn't think it's that bad, but after spending time in the past, he understands the scale of horror, and starts helping slaves escape to the north. Kevin's learning experience, although it wasn't a comforting one, made him into a better, more conscious person who began taking action. I think this shows that by learning about the past, we become educated, conscious individuals capable of making informed decisions. Therefore, I think the 1619 project is important.

Comments

  1. KralNovember 29, 2023 at 3:03 AM

    I like your analogy that Kevin and Dana are students traveling to the past to learn history, and some other blogs have also talked about their role as time-traveling observers. A pro-1776 historian could probably make an argument that every piece of uncomfortable American history would de-patriotize young students, but I agree with your viewpoint that this type of 1619-adjacent literature is important for all students to read.

    ReplyDelete
  2. TaehanDecember 2, 2023 at 10:24 PM

    I think using this book to support the 1776 project falls apart when we analyze Kevin. Kevin is Butler's planted white character that remains relatively unchanged (he does not become a racist) through his experiences in the past. This shows that the 'risk' of rehashing this dark history is not that racial divisions will get worse.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Jes Grew IRL???

Both Mumbo Jumbo and Ragtime  use history to add to the realness of their texts. In Ragtime, Doctorow uses "false documents" that likely aren't true but for the most part can't be disproven to fill in the gaps of real history used in his book. For instance, he depicts J. P. Morgan talking to a seagull in a bout of loneliness, something that cannot be proven nor disproven. Moments like this make Ragtime  feel real.  Mumbo Jumbo takes place around the ragtime period as well, and during the Harlem Renaissance. Jes Grew is an anti-plague that spreads dancing and liveliness, a metaphor for the spread of black culture. The novel identifies things like ragtime and jazz as elements of Jes Grew, but Jes Grew's origins go back thousands of years. Reed uses what I presume to be (mostly) real Egyptian mythology and mumbo jumbo lore as actual history in  Mumbo Jumbo.  By using African history/mythology to set the novel, Reed accomplishes multiple things: he creates an Afrocent
Read more

First Impression of Jason vs final thoughts

 I wrote this after reading the first two chapters of Black Swan Green. It is my first impression of Jason: Jason Taylor is a kid who cares very much about keeping up appearances, similarly to Bruce Bechdel in  Fun Home.  However, unlike how Bruce hid his homosexuality, stammering is the sort of thing that the harder you try to hide it, the more apparent it becomes. He refers to his condition as "Hangman", and has four commandments for it: "Thou shalt hide from speech therapists; Thou shalt strangle Taylor when he is nervous about stammering; Thou shalt ambush Taylor when he is not nervous about stammering; Once Taylor is 'Stutterboy' in the eyes of the world he is  yours " (31). He really wants to maintain his social status and that makes him anxious about his stammer, which makes it all the worse. I've experienced a similar sort of "mental echo chamber" where the more I think about a certain problem, the more it affects me. However, I've
Read more

Meursault and Guitar

Image
When I read about Guitar's involvement in the Days, it reminded me of Meursault. They both committed murder, but in totally different situations. I want to compare and contrast their situations and find some meaning in them.     Meursault committed murder without any clear motive, and with little feeling in it. He holds nihilistic beliefs that allowed him to do that. In contrast, despite a deep aversion to murder, Guitar commits murder out of a sense of duty, as if it were a responsibility of his. His reasoning is that he has to keep the ratio the same between black and white people. He also harbors deep hatred of white people, in contrast to Meursault, who seems to have nothing against Arabs.     Meursault and Guitar are in opposing classes. Guitar knows that black people get no justice in white courts; he believes he is defending his people by killing innocent white people (although in his mind, there are no innocent white people, as every one of them is a potential nword killer)
Read more