Echoes of Younger Brother in Lee Harvey Oswald

So, being the hyper-race-focused social justice warrior that I am, I took note of the few characters of color that appear in the novel. Not to take note of how many there were but rather to analyze what role they might play and therefore how DeLillo (or Oswald) might view the issue of race in the context of Oswald's broader arc towards becoming Kennedy's (supposed) assassin. (Also, I'm specifically looking at Lee's arc since I want to see what race reveals about him as a character.)

It seems relevant to the time period to discuss questions of race. The Civil Rights Movement was just picking up steam, we had troops stationed in various Asian countries creating xenophobic tensions, and, as Libra discusses, we're not exactly on the best terms with Cuba. Not to mention that Kennedy was seen by many to be a champion of civil rights, integration, and racial equality (though we can debate to what extent that was actually true.)

The first time we see any mention of race in Lee's half of the book is when he's bullied for sitting with the black people in the back of the bus. However, before you get any ideas about Oswald's noble intentions, DeLillo makes sure to note that it's not clear whether Oswald did it out of principle or ignorance    Already that gives an odd feeling to the reader. If he had done it out of principle, we would likely respect and admire that, and perceive it as a quality befitting of a budding revolutionary like the one he fancies himself to be. If he had done it out of ignorance, one might merely chuckle at how he stumbled onto a social issue. But the real cause, just wanting to piss people off? That's stupid. Irritatingly stupid. He simply uses the nearest and most convenient situation to advance his narrative as a Real Edgy Boy, paying no mind to the black people as people, specifically people subject to an inhumane system.

Oswald's next interaction with a person of color isn't until his adventures in Japan, where he comes across Konno. I'm not gonna lie, the depiction of Konno made me somewhat uncomfortable. Some parts were charming and nice, seeing Oswald having a friend that he can talk to communism about and feel comfortable with. But Konno plays an age-old classic among older Asian men in Western literature: The Mr. Miyagi, the sage, beard-stroking, fascinating Asian man meant to educate our coming-of-age Western protagonist on the ways of his exotic Oriental world so that the protagonist might discover himself. Not a person in his own right, Konno is instead reduced to his usefulness to Oswald. Again, we see a person of color being used as a mere vehicle for Oswald's ultimate "more important" character arc, with little of his own personality. Oswald even says that he never actually feels like he's talking to a person when he's talking to Konno, that Konno just acts as something he can feed all his thoughts into.

(Also supplementing this dehumanization of Konno is the weird exoticization and sexualization of East Asianness, as some sort of freaky universe to go wild in for a night or two, as if the people in it are utterly alien.)

Oswald's next interaction with a person of color (and his first antagonistic one) is his fight with Rodriguez. (It should be noted that it's not explicitly stated that Rodriguez isn't white, but for my purposes, I'm gonna assume he is.) Like the black people on the bus and Konno before him, Rodriguez acts as a plot vehicle, the only distinction being that this time he's working against Oswald instead of for him.  Oswald sees Rodriguez as a symbolic villain, a way to advance his cause for his "rights" despite the extremely petty nature of the argument he instigates.

The first time Oswald encounters a person of color that isn't a plot vehicle is his cellmate Bobby Dupard in the brig. He expects Dupard to function much in the same way as Konno, even saying that he wishes "for an experienced perspective, for the knowledge of some grizzled figure with kind and tired eyes, a counselor, wise to the game." Again, he wishes for a person of color to guide him and advance his own narrative arc. But Dupard, who is justifiably mostly concerned with his own survival, lacks the capability to give a shit about Oswald. And so Oswald, who has come to expect Dumbledorean figures out of men of color, isn't sure what to make of Dupard. The first person of color that works for themselves instead of for Oswald confuses Oswald since he's so used to having them serve his arc.

All of this is reminiscent of Younger Brother from Doctorow's Ragtime, who I would argue similarly saw people like Coalhouse, Emma Goldman, Evelyn, and Mexican revolutionaries as mere narrative vehicles for his story, completely disposing of their humanity.  And it makes sense that Oswald's narrative would parallel Younger Brother's. One of our major complaints about Younger Brother (or one of mine anyway) was that he never really gave a shit about the causes he participates in, he just wants to belong to something bigger than himself. Someone focused only on belonging will ultimately care little for the struggles of the people he claims to fight for as a communist, only temporarily allying with them so that he can "grow" as a person.

Reliance on Oppressive Structures in Kindred

One of the main things I took away from Ms. Rodems' Gender Studies class was the idea that power and privilege in one group is inhrently reliant on the usbjugation and oppression of another group. For example, the allocation of resources to a wealthier, whiter school district is inherently reliant on the devaluation and underfunding of poorer school districts with a greater black population. Therefore, in order to get rid of those existing oppressive power structures, it is not enough to empower the oppressed population - one must also work to remove privlege and discomfort the existing privileged population in order to achieve any form of equality (tax the 1%!).

Reliance on oppressive structures is a theme that's explored pretty in-depth throughout the course of Kindred. Butler plays with the idea of reliance on oppressive structures by having Dana's very existence hinge on keeping her crazy, abusive, slave-owning ancestor alive and well. In order for her to survive, she must become complicit in the various horrors perpetrated by Rufus and his family, bearing witness to a host of abusive behaviors while doing nothing, since it may harm her own well-being.

However, Butler is taking a different angle than the one I mentioned earlier. Dana is reliant on oppressive power structures and stands to gain from them during her time travel, to the point that the one time she makes a concerted effort to break from them, she literally loses an arm. However, at the same time, Dana herself is a victim of the oppression, which raises a question I had never thought of. To what extent are the lives of oppressed reliant on their oppressors and what implications does it have? It's obvious that those in power would stand to gain something from an oppressive structure, but is it possible that the oppressed are somehow reliant on the same structure as well?)

(It is worth noting, however, that Butler could still be exploring the reliance of privilege on oppressive structures. Since Dana is an educated middle class woman, Butler could be trying to point out that her white ancestry is what enabled her to reach this place of privilege. However, that's not the option I'll be exploring.)

In terms of oppressed groups being reliant on their oppressors, the first example that comes to mind is culture. Now, I'm obviously not saying that Western civilization brought culture to brown and black people (since I'm neither a fifty-year-old white man from the 1800s nor a neo-nazi on a Reddit forum), far from it. Instead, what I am suggesting is that integral parts of the cultures of colonized and enslaved peoples come about as a result of their horrific interactions with their oppressors.

For an example, look at Indonesian culture. Indonesia has often been a beacon for democratic rebellion, priding itself on  However, the origins of that push for democracy arose out of their subjugation by the Netherlands. One of the country's most central values would not have been possible if they had not been colonized. Indonesia is also a heavily Muslim country and prides itself on that as well. However, the spread of Islam throughout the archipelago frankly would not have been possible without the trade network developed and maintained by their Dutch rulers. And yet, just to add another contradiction to the mix, Islam itself was often used as a symbol of rebellion against Western colonialism in the 20th century.

Another example, and one more relevant to Kindred, is Black American culture. Jazz evolved from slave hymns. A vast majority of black Americans follow Christianity, which was introduced to African slaves as a way to . The culture, though not inherently evil on its own, originates and is therefore somewhat reliant on the oppressor.

Butler could be suggesting that, no matter how much you may try to separate yourself from a horrifying and oppressive power structure, you will never truly be able to. You try to succeed and escape poverty, you have to play the rich man's capitalist system. You turn to religion to escape that system, but that very religion was introduced to you by your oppressor. You embrace only your race, your culture, and yet it's the white man that decides that your race is a thing at all. No matter how much we may despise these systems they are a part of us, like an arm we can't bear to lose.