Monday, March 19, 2012

Dependence in Kindred


In the novel Kindred, Rufus refers to Alice and Dana as “one woman…two halves of a whole” (257).  Alice explains that he meant that he liked Alice “in bed, and [Dana] out of bed” (229).  As the title of the novel suggests, Alice and Dana are in fact kin. That Rufus would see them as similar is not shocking.  Rufus’ way of viewing Alice and Dana as one woman is what allows the reader to see the interesting triangle of dependence each of the character’s have on each other.

Rufus’ inability to see Dana and Alice as separate beings points out the dependence each woman has on the other. Sarah points out how they were like “sisters…always fussin’ at each other, stompin’ away from each other, comin’ back” (249).  The relationship between the two kept them both sane and alive.  They relied on each other, as Alice needed Dana to take her anger out on and survive Rufus’ advances, and Dana needed Alice to provide her ancestor. Alice claims that she attacks Dana because she gets “mad…[She] get[s] so mad [she] can taste it in [her] mouth,” and Dana is the “only one [she] can take it out on—the only one [she] can hurt and not be hurt back” (169).  Dana takes the abuse from Alice because she feels guilty. She herself claims that Alice is “like a sister,” and that it was “hard for [her] to watch [Rufus] hurt [Alice]—to know that he had to go on hurting [Alice] if [Dana’s] family was to exist at all” (180).  Just as Dana relied literally on Alice to exist, Alice similarly relied literally on Dana to keep sane.  Without the other, neither woman would be capable of surviving.  It is this dependence more than anything that makes the women two halves of the same whole. 

Rufus also needed both women—both halves—to survive.  He needed Dana literally to keep him alive, and he needed Alice to fulfill his physical urges. Without Dana, Rufus would have died multiple times over.  Yet Dana also needed Alice for the same reason Rufus did.  As long as Alice was around, Rufus had his physical desires fulfilled, and Dana was free from his advances.  However, once Alice died, Dana no longer had her “other half” to protect her from Rufus’ desperation.  Dana realizes that Rufus wants to sleep with her (256).  Without Alice, the “one woman” is left broken, and Rufus attempts to make Dana both halves, but because one half cannot be made whole, he fails. 

Alice herself relies on Rufus to free her children.  For this reason, however, Alice needs Dana, the half that can talk to Rufus and convince him of reason.  Dana recognizes this, and assures Alice that she will “push [Rufus] whenever she can” to free his children (232).  However, once Dana is sent back to her time, Rufus pretends to sell the children, without Dana, Alice is left desperate.  As Dana was not present to perform her duties as the “out of bed” half, and Alice is driven to suicide as a direct result of Rufus’ actions. Sarah explains how he killed Alice, “even if he didn’t put the rope on her, he drove her to it. He sold her babies!” (249).  Unlike Dana, Alice is incapable of surviving Rufus without her other half.

Dana is the only one of the three capable of surviving on her own.  Alice needed Dana because Dana had the power to control Rufus.  Rufus needed Dana also because she was the only one capable of convincing Alice to willingly go to him. Dana, however, had the strength of all of her ancestors, including both Alice and Rufus, and was therefore the only one with the power of all three of them.  For this reason, she was able to kill Rufus when he attempted to blur the lines between the distinct halves, leaving her once again standing alone.

29 comments:

  1. you have an interesting topic, I'm not quite sure that I am understanding what you are arguing. If you want to make it more concise and say that Rufus needs Alice and Dana or if you are just saying that Dana and Alice are similar. I would make the organization more concise as well because I feel that it is a little scattered right now and I wasn't able to follow what you wanted to say fully. For your revision I would focus on what you want to argue and stick with that and also make sure your organization is clear.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really like your argument that the relationship between Alice and Dana (kin; two halves making a whole) is complicated by the addition of Rufus. You mention Alice's line about being able to take out her anger on Dana because Dana is the, "only one she can hurt and not be hurt back". Does this quote complicate the theory that Alice and Dana are essentially ying-and-yang? Does the fact that Dana has a clear purpose for doing the things she does have any impact on the triangle of dependence? You argue in your last paragraph that Dana is the only one of the three who has power--does this come from her knowledge as well as the fact that she is a by-product of Rufus and Alice?

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a really strong piece, I think you bring up solid evidence to convey your point about the varying roles and interactions between each of the characters. What I think you can expand on is how the lines blur in the mind of Rufus when looking at Dana, and how she loses that control one Alice is gone. I would work some things you mention in your conclusion in your introduction, the fact that Dana holds multiple traits of other characters is something I would deconstruct a bit more.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is a great close reading! I really connect and follow with your idea of the triangle of dependence that the three characters make. I think you could make the piece even stronger if you talk more about how Dana's absence in the triangle complicates the "equilibrium" that the characters share. You mention towards the end Dana is the only one able to stand alone and I think using that idea with how she effects it when she is gone could really strengthen your piece more. Overall though this is a wonderful piece.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is very interesting and a great close read. At the end though you say that Dana is the only one capable of surviving on her own, why does this matter to your argument. In the intro you say each character depends on each other, but at the end you argue Dana can be independent. I think if you have a better concluding paragraph and explain this, your close reading will tie up nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think you have a very interesting argument here, but I would have liked to see you explore the impacts of this love triangle a just a little bit more. Yes, each character needs and relies on the others, but implications does that have for the text? Could you take this just a step further?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I love what you've done with the idea of dependence here. I had assumed it would be about Rufus and Dana but bringing in Dana and Alice's dependence on each other is definitely interesting. I agree with Amy. What are the consequences of this dependency?

    ReplyDelete
  8. As others have said, what the implications of the dependency? Also, why is it significant that Dana is the only one of three that can survive on their own. Overall, it appears that you are headed in a good direction after you fix the finer points.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think you have a very clear argument about Dana and Alice being very comparable. Additionally, I like how you point out the triangle of needs between Alice, Dana, and Rufus. However, does Rufus really have an "inability" to see the difference between the two? Maybe he is just using his dominance (as a white male) over the two. A piece of evidence you might also want to use is when the patrolman thought Dana was Alice's twin.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I see a lot of meat within your argument, but it's easy to get lost because you have so many factors of dependence stacked upon each other. I think you mostly need to keep your argument consistent: In some places you say that Dana relied on Alice for her survival (literally), and then in your last paragraph you say that she's the only one who could survive without dependence on another. I think you also confuse the reader a bit with your use of "survival". I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "survival," I was reading it literally but that doesn't always match up with the context you put it in. For example, does Rufus really need Alice, a physical outlet, to survive? I see how he needs Dana, but putting Alice on this same level may be a stretch. I see stretches like these in other parts of your argument as well- it would be helpful to define exactly what you mean when you say things like this. I think you have a really good start to this, clearly the ideas are there, they just need a little work!

    ReplyDelete
  11. This is an interesting concept and it seems like you have a really strong grasp on the complex relationships between the three characters. Your paper does get a little hard to follow, though, with all of the jumping back and forth between who needs whom and for what. The most interesting piece of this paper is the last line of the third paragraph, where you talk about the "one woman" being broken after Alice's death. I wonder if there's a way to re-work this paper with a focus on that brokenness and its significance for Dana.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I like the idea of dependency in Kindred. It seems to be an implicit, but important theme of the novel. However, like others have said, this piece need some organization. I suggest adding in the implications of this dependency. Also, you mention Dana can be independent and I am not sure I follow that argument. Also, I am not sure how it fits into the piece as a whole. With some more organization and description, this has potential to be a great close read.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Interesting topic but you need to work on why this triangle of dependence is important, the "so what." There is also a lot of information here because there are so many dimensions to how the three characters depend on each other. So maybe focus on less dimensions of dependence and find the importance of it to the text. Great start!

    ReplyDelete
  14. This was truly a great piece of writing. My only advice is to maybe expand on the 3 quotes in paragraph 1. Other than that I was very impressed with your writing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great job! Your post was really interesting as I had never thought of the 3 characters as so interconnected. I think you do a wonderful job proving that the characters are all dependent upon one another and are very much in a triangle. However I think you are missing the "so what" portion of this connection. Why is it significant that these characters need each other to survive? How does our realization of this triangle relationship change our reading of the book?

    ReplyDelete
  16. I love your paper! It's an original argument and you explain it so well. The one thing I would suggest is perhaps expand on how Dana is the strongest of the two. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that she can go back and forth from her present to their time. Using quotes and analyzing them would greatly support your argument. Overall, great job!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I appreciate how detailed your argument is. You consider a variety of factors that we should all consider when reading into this triangle of relationships. One thought that I had while reading, though it might not be worth your time, is looking at the fact that Alice needs Dana to take out her anger on, because of the pain she feels from her relationship with Rufus, but Dana needs Alice to feel that pain in order to protect the family line. Does that make Dana bad in some ways? She almost encourages Dana to continue sleeping with Rufus because she needs Hagar to be born. I wonder what we can make of that.

    ReplyDelete
  18. i think this is really well done and thought out! you do a great job of examining the power dynamics of all characters. i think i would make your last paragraph a body paragraph and add a conclusion. one thing i would perhaps clarify, is that while dana needs rufus and alice to survive, she has more power over all, because she has the ability to get them to do what she most needs them to do.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I like that you decided to take on what may seem to be an "obvious" connection but turn it into a close read. I really like you concluding paragraph, but I think you should move it up to the beginning to clarify your thesis and these three characters connections a bit more.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I think you need to unpack your quotes more, and I think having more of a centralized argument will do that. I also think Dana absolutely needs the other two to survive. Literally. If they do not have her great-whatever, she won't be born. Sharpen up your thesis a bit more, and you will have a wonderful paper. Good start.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I can't quite pin down why, but while reading your close reading I felt like you were really try to pinpoint the dependence between Alice and Dana. I was wondering why Rufus was involved in this. I mean, clearly he's a major player as to why the two women are connected but something in your wording suggests that there is a triangle of dependence but that your argument is only for the two women. I could be wrong, but that was just my initial reaction.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I can tell that you put a lot of effort into your argument because it is so well constructed. I don't have much to add besides perhaps a focus on the strength of Dana's character would make this piece stronger, because her relationship with other characters is so interesting and telling of her character.

    ReplyDelete
  23. You're right in noticing that the three clearly have a strange relationship, but I'm not quite sure I follow your logic. I'm not sure you have the right wording to make your claims--the dependencies seem to be a little misaligned (Dana's existence, Alice's sanity, and Rufus' pleasure aren't really on the same level). I'm also confused in your conclusion where you state that Dana is the only one who could survive on her own, but I thought your argument was that the three are equally dependent.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The idea raised within the novel of Alice and Dana being one woman was something that stood out to me was a significant part of the story which stood out to me and I think your argument about how Dana, Alice, and Rufus are all dependent upon one another is interesting. However, I do have a counterargument for one of your claims. In your third paragraph you discuss how Rufus needed Alice to fulfill his physical desires, but I have to disagree and think that is only a mere portion of what he needed her for. Rufus could have chosen any of the female slaves to forcibly have sex with in order to meet his “physical desires”, but he specifically chose Alice because he loved her and although he couldn’t make her love him back he could wield his power over her as her master by raping her. I feel this is something you should clarify more within your argument of that form of dependence Rufus had on Alice.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think you take a very interesting approach to the levels of dependence presented in the novel. I think your strongest one is the dependence on 'kin,' family. Is that really the dependence that holds everything together? Dana is there for Rufus and Alice because they are her family and the way they rely on her is in a familial way. Which is why, when Rufus crosses this familial line, Dana is pushed to kill him. This might be a way to center the levels of dependence you raise.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think this was a great read. Pointing out that Dana is the only one of the three who is independent seems to be a great explanation to how she is able to kill Rufus. I think it would be interesting to think about the dependence Dana maintains as well. Without her ancestors Dana would not exist.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This was really well done and very interesting. I think your conclusion is very strong, I would like to see your introduction be that strong. Your thesis needs to make a more clear argument, because I began reading it as if it were just a summary of the story.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Overall I thought that this was a strong reading.. I think that you include some interesting points in your conclusion that it would be nice to touch on earlier on in the paper and a stronger thesis to tie the entire paper would be helpful. Other than that great ideas and reading. Nice work.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think your paper is strong, however I would agree with many and say I would move your conclusion up and I would make what you're saying a little more concise. Maybe more analysis of what is happening too in the second paragraph, you seem to be summarizing in a way and I want to know why the things that they are saying are particularly significant.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.