In class we had a large discussion about the morality of Rufus and whether or not he is a good person. Many people in the class said that they have no sympathy for him at all and that he is a monster "regardless of time period". I think this view is misguided. I shouldn't even have to clarify, but I am by no means saying that Rufus' decisions and actions were "good". By our moral standards, Rufus is as horrible a person can get. But that is the point, we are judging him by our moral standards instead of his time periods standards. This blindness makes us miss a point that I think the novel was trying to make; the corruption that power brings.
We see Rufus as a child where he is a compassionate person. He starts out like most people are without a inherent racism or a genetic feeling of superiority. But as he his raised he is constantly bombarded with these viewpoints. It is not only told to him that white people are superior, but it is demonstrated to him that white people are superior. If these two things happen, how can you blame someone for growing up believing that white people are superior. And what is even more twisted about this situation is that Rufus isn't allowed to act in a way that we would consider to be normal. Even though he loves a black woman, the only way he knows how to demonstrate this love is through rape (because him actually marrying her as an equal is unheard of and not allowed). When you look at it this way it is pretty easy to see the sympathetic qualities of Rufus' life. He was never even given a chance to make the right decisions for himself. I am by no means trying to lighten the actual terrible things that Rufus does but at the same time, it is important to understand that people like Rufus are "doomed" to be terrible people from their birth.
We see Rufus as a child where he is a compassionate person. He starts out like most people are without a inherent racism or a genetic feeling of superiority. But as he his raised he is constantly bombarded with these viewpoints. It is not only told to him that white people are superior, but it is demonstrated to him that white people are superior. If these two things happen, how can you blame someone for growing up believing that white people are superior. And what is even more twisted about this situation is that Rufus isn't allowed to act in a way that we would consider to be normal. Even though he loves a black woman, the only way he knows how to demonstrate this love is through rape (because him actually marrying her as an equal is unheard of and not allowed). When you look at it this way it is pretty easy to see the sympathetic qualities of Rufus' life. He was never even given a chance to make the right decisions for himself. I am by no means trying to lighten the actual terrible things that Rufus does but at the same time, it is important to understand that people like Rufus are "doomed" to be terrible people from their birth.
And one implication of seeing Rufus as "doomed" is that Butler turns our attention away from the individual slaveholder and his or her "soul"--"What was *wrong* with these people?"--and toward the larger social context that produces them: the novel isn't about the moral conscience of the slaveholder but the corrupting nature of the system itself, as you say, and this is a crucial distinction. At the same time, though, it's important to recognize the ways that Rufus is different from his father. Dana *does* have some pretty profound influence on him, and to a significant extent he really isn't a one-dimensional monster. I find him a more interesting and compelling character *because* we see him not able to express his "love" for Alice in anything like a tender or "loving" way--his world literally does not make this something he's able to express in anything other than violence, and that is profoundly messed up.
ReplyDelete