I think all of the people who've read Kindred can agree that Rufus committed terrible actions. He raped a woman he claimed he loved, indirectly played a role in her husband's death and turning her into his slave, and forced her to live through an abhorrent pretense of affection and childbearing under the constant fear of violence. This women, who you might know better as Alice, eventually killed herself due to Rufus deciding SELLING HER CHILDREN (even if it was a only as a reversible punishment) was a good move. Of course, don't forget Rufus' role in Dana's own traumatic experiences, including separating Dana from her husband (through refusing to send Kevin her letters and then lying about it), shoots at her, sends her to work in the fields where she is severely whipped as a ridiculous punishment for her not saving his father, and directly causes Dana to lose an ENTIRE ARM. Gee, Rufus, good job!
Yet, as a child, Rufus seems innocent and kind, helping Dana escape the plantation and acts friendly towards Nigel. What happened to that version of Rufus? It leads us to a bigger question that Kindred explores within the novel: Nature V.S Nurture. With even Dana, who directly experiences violence through Rufus' actions, struggling to distance herself from him and see him as a "bad" person, it leads to a couple of questions: Is Rufus a "bad" person, or is he simply a product of his environment? And perhaps a better question: if Rufus's horrible actions can be proven by environmental factors, does that excuse or remove the blame from Rufus?
Of course, many external factors during Rufus' life play a role in how Rufus perceives the world and one could argue there is a direct influence on the environment on Rufus's actions and behavior. For example, Rufus, with his father portraying relationships as ones that can be violent with enforced punishment, his mother painting an overbearing, almost obsessive idea of love, and living during a time period with a normalization of the commodification and ownership of human beings, obviously did seem to play a role in Rufus's incredibly twisted impression about love and thus his relationship with Alice and Dana.
However, even with these outside factors perhaps providing an explanation for Rufus's shockingly awful character, it does not justify Rufus as a "good" person or mitigate the harm he's played a role in. Sure, the factors may have influenced his actions, but he, like anybody, has the capability and willpower to chose the right decision. Rufus had so many chances within the book to turn Alice and Dana's situation around in a positive way, yet every time he chose the option leading to his own best benefit. If Octavia E. Butler wanted to portray Rufus really as a "good" person, she would have shown him rising ABOVE his environment and still choosing to be benevolent throughout the pressure. Alas, Rufus allows himself to succumb to his selfish and base desires, turning himself into quite a despicable person by the end of Kindred.
Great blog post! I definitely agree that his parents' behavior and the slavery-driven environment he grew up in shaped Rufus's views and supported his later horrible actions. I also agree that although Rufus is a product of his environment, that does not excuse nor justify his hurting of others. However, I think that what Rufus considers "right" and "wrong" must be considered. In this slavery-driven environment with a father who displays violent enforcement and relationships, Rufus, and other white slave masters of the time, thought it morally acceptable to dehumanize and exploit black people for their own profit. In Rufus's mind and from the viewpoint of the 1815 antebellum south society, Rufus's actions are all completely acceptable. However, we categorize Rufus's actions as "horrible" and "inexcusable" today. If Rufus acted less horribly in a time where many acted similarly or worse, and the society around him justified his actions, is Rufus really a terrible person, or is he better than other slave masters?
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you mentioned at the end of your post that if Butler wanted to portray Rufus as a good person, she would have him rise above his environment. While Rufus is an example of how the environment of the antebellum period was extremely harmful, I do also believe there are alternative versions that can exist where someone with as much power as Rufus can resist the impacts of their environment.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Steph! I agree that Butler could have portrayed Rufus in a positive light, yet she chose not to for a reason. Butler specifically formed Rufus's character in a confused way, and it was clear that she put much thought into the many aspects of who Rufus is. She both wanted to confuse Dana and confuse the readers, but ended it with showing that Rufus has choices and he could have been a good person.
ReplyDeleteI think Rufus picks up a lot of his evil tendencies due to a mixture of the two. In modern day, he could get away with being a somewhat pitiable dude that had a rough upbringing and family (which does fall into nurture) and then proceeded to become a creep due to what I think could be fair to call his more emotional view on life than his father (which you could call nature). I think a larger role in the story is the time period. While in present day, he'd just be a loser, in his time period, he's a loser with power. It allows him to act upon the worst parts of himself and face no consequences. In that, his nurture/environment is what makes him so bad. I'm sure he would have plenty of despicable thoughts if he were a dude in 2023, but the time period lets him perform despicable actions, and I think what we see as 'evil' about Rufus are his actions above all else.
ReplyDeleteYou pose an interesting question about whether Rufus' actions can be excused because of the nature of the environment he grows up in. I think Butler tries hard to make Rufus complex and multifaceted. By highlighting his individuality, she seems to suggest that there is no excuse for the way he treats others because he has full autonomy.
ReplyDeleteVery excellent post! I think an important theme in Rufus' nurturing is the upward battle that Dana has to fight. Comparatively Dana has very little contact with Rufus, and this may be a primary reason for Rufus turning more and more to his age as he gets older. When Rufus is a kid Dana is able to have a relatively bigger influence on him, and we see that he is a kind child. He is unaware of the 'why' behind his racist notions, and is only with time that we see this get destroyed in his character.
ReplyDelete