Shadows of Power: Dana's Parallels Between Kevin and The Weylin Men
Shadows of Power: Dana's Parallels Between Kevin and The Weylin Men
In Octavia Butler's Kindred, Dana constantly notices parallels between her white husband, Kevin, and the Weylin men, two white plantation owners who enslave her during her forced trips to the antebellum South. These parallels, however, do not suggest that Kevin shares the same outlook on slavery as Rufus and Mr. Weylin; rather Butler uses them to hint at how deeply woven racism and power dynamics are into American history. Dana's outlook on Kevin begins to change: she deeply loves him, but she cannot shake the ways he is able to protect himself by being a white man. Butler throughout the novel creates a main theme that the present is shaped by the past, she explores this theme by showing how hard it is for Kevin and Dana to keep up their "act" while living in the 1800s.
The first parallel Dana realizes is how privileged Kevin becomes because of his whiteness. When Kevin enters the 1800s for the first time, Mr. Weylin welcomes him and assumes he is Dana's master without question. Kevin is able to speak and move freely in the Weylin household simply because they assume he is a slave owner---since, in their time period, the white man is always in control. Dana becomes more and more uncomfortable as she notices not only how quickly Tom Weylin welcomes Kevin, but also how quickly Kevin is able to adapt to the social roles of a white man in the 1800s. Kevin has the ability to coexist in the 1800s because he doesn't experience slavery first hand. Dana, however, establishes friendships while on the plantation, and she reads to enslaved children, hoping that one day they can write their way to freedom. Kevin tutors Rufus, but Dana's work will have a greater impact because she is empowering an enslaved child to have the skills to escape. Both of their races are limiting them in different ways: Kevin must be an observer, coexisting, while Dana must immerse herself in slavery in order to survive.
Rufus, Tom Weylin, and Kevin all have blinders on when it comes to seeing slavery in an emotional light. Dana tries to explain what she has gone through in the antebellum south, but he will never fully grasp the full emotional and physical pain that Dana experiences as an enslaved black woman. Kevin's inability to understand mirrors Rufus's and Tom Weylin's inability and refusal to completely empathize with enslaved people. Kevin's blinders are far more sympathetic, but they still expose how even anti-racist white people will never fully understand the weight of racial trauma.
Through these parallels, Butler isn't criticizing Kevin; instead, she's portraying the novel's main theme---that the present will continue to be shaped by history. Kevin worries he'll become more like the Weylins, so he actively tries to resist it. Dana worries that she will become more like Alice, controlled by a man who has power over her. She looks out for these parallels because she believes that she and Kevin will never conform to the racial hierarchy of the 1800s. However, Dana comes to the realization that it's not that easy to stay an observer. She begins to live life as a slave, to the point where Alice asks her what it's like to be a slave. Dana then begins to wonder when she stopped "acting," and she speculates how Kevin was during the 5 years he was living in the 1800s.
To close, Dana's observation of the parallels between Kevin and the Weylins relates to a deeper point of Butler's theme: the present cannot go untouched by the shadows of history. Kevin doesn't become a slave owner, and he continuously resists the norms of the 1800s, yet he still benefits from the structure of that society. Dana, however, to her own disgust unknowingly slips into the roles of an enslaved, even when she believes she is still 'acting.' These blurred lines show how powerful the legacy of slavery is, even across centuries. By forcing Dana and Kevin into the 1800s, they begin to fully understand how history repeats itself. Only then can they try to resist becoming a part of it, to shine a light on the shadows of history that weaves its way into the present day.
Works Cited
Butler, Octavia E. Kindred. Beacon Press, 1979.
Hi Zoe, you draw many strong parallels between Kevin and the Weylin men. You also make an important observation that Butler isn't necessarily criticizing Kevin for being white; rather, she is pointing to a bigger theme: the legacies of slavery continue to persist, even implicitly. Kevin's identity and role in the novel were definitely not accidental, and it is really intersting to see how Dana reacts to Kevin's behavior and actions in the 1800s.
ReplyDeleteHey Zoe, I think that Kevin is a really interesting character in Kindred. In my opinion there are two ways to interpret Kevin, first as a criticism of an ignorant white man of his time, or not as a criticism but simply as a character that is solely shaped by his time. I think that in a way I agree with your interpretation to an extent but I also think that Butler is criticizing Kevin because of his ignorance. He can't comprehend what it is really like to be Dana and says many ignorant things that show that he was formed in a modern perspective. But that's just my view. Great work! -Mateo
ReplyDeleteZoe, I think this post is a great highlight of this specific complexity in Kindred. Throughout the novel, undoubtedly Dana loses a lot of her trust and comfort with Kevin. She becomes uncomfortably aware of the power dynamics between them, and now that she has seen how power / privilege can be used to hurt people (by Tom and Rufus Weylin), she is terrified, at least subconsciously. At the end of the novel, we are left with the impression that it will take a while for Dana to be able to fully trust Kevin again. Great post!
ReplyDeleteHi Zoe! I really like how you concluded your post, showing the broader themes of Kindred and how, like you mentioned, our present doesn't exist without slavery in our past, and the legacy of slavery follows everyone to where we are now. I really liked your emphasis on how Dana and Kevin being put into the past demonstrates how easy it is to have history repeat itself even you know the consequences and or outcomes. Great post!
ReplyDeleteHey Zoe! I appreciated your view on Kevin's lack of ability to fully understand the weight of the past on African Americans and how intertwined slavery is with their identity as a whole. You're correct in saying Butler isn't critiquing him, instead she is illustrating the implicit bias and limitations that anyone outside of a minority holds, drawing attention to the need to work and try to understand better. Great post!
ReplyDeleteThis is really well-written! I agree that Kevin, Rufus, and Tom are all limited in their understanding of slavery as they are not enslaved. I would also say that perhaps the fact that they participate more passively allows them (specifically Tom and Rufus) to cope with the horrors that they force others to endure. They have to be observers because it takes off some guilt that they would otherwise face. Tom Weylin does this by being a fair-slave owner; he keeps his word and complies with the system, a complacency that makes him feel as though he's just doing what he ought to, not actually an evil man. Rufus... I don't know. What do you think?
ReplyDeleteButler could have gone in a much darker and more disturbing direction with Kevin's storyline, as he is stranded in a historical era where his race and gender grant him absolute power. But the power doesn't end up corrupting him as it might have, which is a relief. I like your description of the power dynamics as "woven into" the history--not just a single "ingredient" that can be ignored or skipped over. Kevin has no choice but to play the role of a slave owner--he can't alienate the Weylins and claim to be a rabid abolitionist, for example. And he does try to play the role with some irony, making himself sound "horrible" and freaking Dana out in the process. But it seems important to Kevin that his "cover story" be completely separable from his actual relationship with Dana--he can more easily "play the role" if the role is a dramatically evil villain. But then, when he arranges for Dana to share his room at night, we see how he does end up performing a perverse and distorted version of their actual marriage. As we see when Dana feels *actual shame* upon meeting Tom in the hall as she sneaks out of Kevin's room, the time-travelers don't get to redefine the power dynamics. They are in effect whether they like it or not.
ReplyDelete