For my panel presentation I found an article that blew me away. It took everything I had been thinking and moved it up another level. ("The Dislocation of Agency in Don DeLillo's Libra" by Michael James Rizza)
In particular it talks about the control that the plotters have. It attributes the role of mastermind behind the plot to chance. No-ones really in charge but a series of coincidences. Thinking about this shed new light on history. It really is a tide, as we said in class. It's a tide though that we somehow manage to project our desires onto, attributing the various crashes of the wave upon the shore to our own actions.
Lee embodies this the most. He sees himself in third person, he views his life in terms of how people view him and acts on it. What he projects on the outside is what history picks up, but what he feels on the inside is what Delillo can only guess at.
These guesses are the basis of the unknown elements of history, what we perceive to be coincidence. Rizza mentions a multitude of Dellilo's other work in showing this theme, and it is truly fascinating. I look forward to presenting it in class.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Watching The Zapruder Film
In class we watched the Zapruder film on loop while a passage from one of Delillo's other books was read. It fascinated me, the passage about the disgust that people felt.
It just built up the certainty of the event, which was weird because every time it was a shock to see a man die. They would round the corner, and as far as I was concerned JFK was going to continue on his motorcade, then ,seemingly out of nowhere, his head explodes.
I should see it coming, I know he's going to die every time nothing will change the fact that he did die. But I can't help but be a little surprised everyrtime. The sheer coincidence of the film eventually began to sink in as well. The fact that JFK was there, on that day, and that Oswald (or whomever you may believe) took that shot is amazing. Every occurance in some degree is a result of a seemingly staggering amount of coincidences.
I can't determine if it's coincidence or the unknown though. Is my ignorance simply viewed by myself as coincidence. There is the undeniable fact that a bullet went through a mass that I labeled as JFK. By projecting emotions onto the scene I change the meaning of the scene. It's much more than just an assassination. It's a statement on everything from Cuba, to the shooter himself.
It just built up the certainty of the event, which was weird because every time it was a shock to see a man die. They would round the corner, and as far as I was concerned JFK was going to continue on his motorcade, then ,seemingly out of nowhere, his head explodes.
I should see it coming, I know he's going to die every time nothing will change the fact that he did die. But I can't help but be a little surprised everyrtime. The sheer coincidence of the film eventually began to sink in as well. The fact that JFK was there, on that day, and that Oswald (or whomever you may believe) took that shot is amazing. Every occurance in some degree is a result of a seemingly staggering amount of coincidences.
I can't determine if it's coincidence or the unknown though. Is my ignorance simply viewed by myself as coincidence. There is the undeniable fact that a bullet went through a mass that I labeled as JFK. By projecting emotions onto the scene I change the meaning of the scene. It's much more than just an assassination. It's a statement on everything from Cuba, to the shooter himself.
Libra's Value as a Historical Text
Reading Libra I've noticed that Delillo seems to take historical facts that are known and fabricate the unknown. He puts people in the places they were, at the times they were known to be there. But fills in the blank. We don't know how Lee grew up or his family life. But we still get a clear picture in Libra. Everything Dellillo inserts seems like it belongs.And there's, to my limited knowledge, no way to disprove anything he says throughout the novel.
This got me thinking. Once a historian knows every fact recorded about an event, isn't a novel such as Libra the next natural step? Delillo seems to know everything there is to know. He's literally only filling in the blanks which is motivation.
We know Lee shot the president, we know that in the end as it was said It's a bullet killing another man. But we don't know what makes these men. What to led to the cosmic coincidence that these two people were in the same city on the same day? Why did one want to kill the other? Understanding things such as this give us a better picture of humanity, and wast make us do what we do. In the end its what we really learn from history, it doesn't matter that Kennedy got shot, it matters why he got shot, and what the event will lead to in terms of motivation for the next piece of history.
In fact I've done a similar thing in my short story. I've been trying to explore the insignificant. What goes unrecorded and unnoticed can often be as big a part of history as anything else. This concept continues to fascinate me throughout Libra. I look forward to seeing what people think of this idea in class.
This got me thinking. Once a historian knows every fact recorded about an event, isn't a novel such as Libra the next natural step? Delillo seems to know everything there is to know. He's literally only filling in the blanks which is motivation.
We know Lee shot the president, we know that in the end as it was said It's a bullet killing another man. But we don't know what makes these men. What to led to the cosmic coincidence that these two people were in the same city on the same day? Why did one want to kill the other? Understanding things such as this give us a better picture of humanity, and wast make us do what we do. In the end its what we really learn from history, it doesn't matter that Kennedy got shot, it matters why he got shot, and what the event will lead to in terms of motivation for the next piece of history.
In fact I've done a similar thing in my short story. I've been trying to explore the insignificant. What goes unrecorded and unnoticed can often be as big a part of history as anything else. This concept continues to fascinate me throughout Libra. I look forward to seeing what people think of this idea in class.
Is Lee a Patsy?
Reading Libra I'm unsure of what to think of Lee. Is he stupid? or does he have an awareness most of us lack? After all I would be unable to think of myself as a cog in the machine of history. But then again I'm not much of a cog. I don't want to be much of a cog. I like to think that I'm in-control of myself, that I make the right choices rather than best ones.
But lee, he values himself as a critical cog in the machine. He likes to feel like he's important even if he doesn't necessarily agree with what he has to do.
Which begs the question, is Lee a patsy? To me the answer is no. Sure Ferrie may think he's playing him, but Lee seems to be aware of what's going on. He's willing to be their pawn. After all Ferrie does say something to the affect of Lee being a constructed identity that's already built. He doesn't seem to be a pawn but rather a piece of a large puzzle that is the entire conspiracy, along with his co-conspirators who seem to think that they're playing him.
But lee, he values himself as a critical cog in the machine. He likes to feel like he's important even if he doesn't necessarily agree with what he has to do.
Which begs the question, is Lee a patsy? To me the answer is no. Sure Ferrie may think he's playing him, but Lee seems to be aware of what's going on. He's willing to be their pawn. After all Ferrie does say something to the affect of Lee being a constructed identity that's already built. He doesn't seem to be a pawn but rather a piece of a large puzzle that is the entire conspiracy, along with his co-conspirators who seem to think that they're playing him.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)