These Do Relate Somehow, I Think...

While I was researching more information for my semester project, which is about Hiroo Onoda, a Japanese soldier who fought in World War II that didn't surrender until 1974 (for anybody that was interested), I came across this:

http://www.cracked.com/article_17019_5-real-life-soldiers-who-make-rambo-look-like-pussy.html

This just amazed me, and the way I think of these men, having now learned a bit about them, is similar to the way I think of Lee Harvey Oswald from Libra. Those men did these incredible things, that any ordinary person would never be able to do. Lee Harvey Oswald is similar. Not that many people have killed a president before. Just like these amazing war veterans and Oswald, they needed either incredible bravery or lots of stupidity to do what they do. I tend to learn towards bravery for these war veterans but I'm still not too sure about Oswald. It definitely takes courage to stood yourself in the arm, but it's also not exactly a bright idea. In a way, those men that did these amazing things, such as taking German outposts by themselves, walking out of a concentration camp, or sniping people with a rifle is also a bit stupid. Don't get me wrong though, I'm not hating on these people or saying that they shouldn't have done what they did. I just think that they were a bit reckless when they did what they did. Obviously it did pay off for them, but it didn't exactly pay off for Oswald.

Also, can't forget about poor Hiroo Onoda. The man was left on an island, his men were all killed (except this one guy that surrendered, but that's beside the point), and he was more or less living off coconuts and the occasional animal. He had been wearing the same uniform from when he was deployed, and managed to keep his gun in working condition, stockpiled 500 rounds of ammo, and had many hand grenades. However, he still had managed to kill around 30 Filipinos and wounded several more. The only reason Onoda didn't surrender or kill himself was because his commanding officer had told him not to, and that they'd come back for him. I'm amazed by his dedication to his commanding officer and to his duty. This definitely took bravery. I'm not sure if I would see what he did as requiring stupidity. To a certain degree, I guess.

But back to the original matter at hand (though I regret nothing about going off about those awesome people), Oswald is like these people in that they all did something that you wouldn't expect. Granted it might not be the most admirable things that they did, like conducting guerrilla attacks on unsuspecting and innocent civilians (for Onoda) or shooting the president, but it still takes bravery and the occasional stupidity. It also takes dedication, either for sticking to the job, or even carefully thinking of a plan. I know, it's kind of a stretch, but as I was thinking about how badass those men were, I couldn't help but think (in my semi-strange mind) that they shared some qualities with Oswald. Maybe they don't, but who knows. It's been well established that it's hard to really describe Oswald. I would say more, but my brain has run out of ideas. Hopefully as I continue to read Libra, I'll be able to understand Oswald better, but who knows? Maybe I'll just get even more confused than I already am.

Final Impressions?

So after I finished Kindred and completely forgot to write my final impressions of the book, I guess now's as good a time as any. With the way Dana was summoned back to the past before she killed Rufus, I can't help wonder if maybe Rufus had figured out how to summon her. Maybe summon isn't the right word, because it makes Dana seem like a servant, but then again, Dana seemed to be acting more like the slaves on the plantation every time she went back. But I digress. Rufus' life didn't seem to be in any danger. He was just contemplating whether or not he should kill himself after he had found Alice's body. This was quite different from all the other times Dana had come back to see Rufus. Every other time, she had found Rufus nearing death or fearing it. This time Rufus was calm, collected, and almost content. I didn't get the impression that Rufus was afraid of death, but I did get the feeling that he was satisfied that Dana had come back. It almost seems like Rufus knew if he threatened his life, Dana would come. But this confuses me even more. If Rufus didn't fear death and if his life wasn't even really in danger (at least in my opinion), then what's been pulling Dana back? The idea that Dana was being pulled back in time whenever Rufus feared for his life worked until this last time. So, my opinion, which could be completely wrong, is that Dana was pulled back in time whenever Rufus needed or wanted a companion, or just somebody who he could talk to. It doesn't fit every scenario perfectly, but I feel like it's plausible. Except for the first time Dana came back, one of the things Dana did without fail was talk to Rufus for long periods of time. Sure, Dana had her reasons for wanting to talk to Rufus, but what if Rufus had reasons other than wanting to know more about Dana and where she came from? It didn't seem like he could talk for long periods of time about his problems to either of his parents or Nigel, who would have had to work. Dana might not have been able to understand Rufus completely, but to me, she seemed like the person who would be able to listen to Rufus' problems and possibly give him advice the best out of any alternatives.

The next question that popped into my head was, is Rufus what anchors Dana to the past? I mean this in both the literal and the figurative sense. Rufus is Dana's ancestor, she's looking at her own history, and looking at her white roots when she looks at Rufus. But beyond the more complex stuff that could end up in lots of arguments or possibly philosophical questions, does Rufus' existence actually keep Dana in the past? I get that when her life is in danger, she goes back to the present, but after Dana killed Rufus, I wondered, did she go back that time because Rufus wasn't living anymore? I mean, when she's transported (or however you describe Dana going back to her time) to the present, every part of her except the arm that Rufus was holding on to comes back with her. So was it because Rufus was something that couldn't go to Dana's time the reason why what he was touching didn't go back with Dana? To me it seems like it could happen, but again, like every theory I have, I could be completely wrong.

Lastly, I was left wondering, can the ending of the book be considered a 'happy ending'? I mean, Dana and Kevin live, and Hagar obviously lived, which is good. But Dana and Kevin are very changed. Dana even thought of herself almost as a slave at one point in the book. Kevin was stranded in the past for years, and had troubles adjusting to the present once he came back. This doesn't seem like your traditional happy ending. In the traditional happy ending, everybody comes back relatively unscathed and those that do come back injured make a swift recovery and everybody is happy and there's reason to celebrate. In Kindred, Dana kills her own ancestor. That must feel weird. She even learned firsthand some of the terrible experiences that slaves had. She has scars to prove it, and Kevin has a scar or two to show what he's been through as well. Overall, I feel that the ending of Kindred set itself up almost for a sequel, or at least a short story on what happened to Dana and Kevin's life afterwards. I probably won't ever find out, but I can still dream.

Thinking About This Gives Me A Headache

While idly wondering about Dana's time travels and what mysterious force is bringing her to Rufus, I came upon something that just gave me a headache. And instead of being a normal person and just forgetting about it, I decided to write about it and melt my brain! Was it already predetermined that Dana was to travel back in time to take care of Rufus? It seems she's drawn to Rufus every time his life is in danger, so she can make sure Rufus and Alice will make Hagar, but what if Dana wasn't able to go back in time? Would she just never exist? I mean, sure by ensuring that Rufus lives, the chances of Dana existing are much higher than if he were dead, but if Dana wasn't the one to go back in time, would Rufus still be facing the same problems? Would he still be in these situations that requires somebody to intervene? If Dana hadn't been sent to the river when Rufus was drowning, would his father or someone else have been able to save Rufus? Similarly, when Rufus was burning the drapes, would he have survived if the fire had spread? While we can't know for certain, it's still possible that Rufus would have survived. Even if his father were to beat him for it, Rufus has said before that Margret had been able to stop Tom Weylin from killing Rufus when the stable was burned down. When she saves him from being killed by Isaac, it seemed that Alice was trying to get Isaac to stop beating the snot out of Rufus. So, if Dana weren't to go back in time, would she cease to exist? It may seem like it but maybe not. Luckily the longer I thought about this, the less confusing and headache-inducing it seemed.

But it gave me another idea. What if, instead of Dana going back primarily to make sure that Rufus is safe, she's going back to make Rufus a better person? He isn't exactly a great person at the beginning, though that might just be because he's a little kid, and not all kids are really good people at that point in their life. Though when Dana comes to Rufus recently, he seems to be both a likable and despicable person. He rapes Alice, his childhood friend, just because he wanted to be with her and she didn't. That's even worse than some other half-assed excuse. However, he does take care of Dana and makes sure she isn't bothered too much by Tom Weylin. He seems to see her as a mother figure or somebody he can rely on. He seems to need her help and company, and he even listens to what she says and follows her instructions. This seems to be a pivotal point in Rufus' life, and maybe Dana's here to nudge him on the path to being a kind and understanding man. However, this is just a theory I came up with, so it's probably not even close to being right and I'm just completely looking at this the wrong way. Either way, I want to see how Rufus turns out with Dana's influence on him. I can't wait to finish this book, but I'll just have to deal with it.

How Could You, Rufus?!

So after rereading the long reading assignment, I only have one thing to say. How could you, Rufus?! It's not okay to rape black women, even if the other white people tell you it's okay. It's really worrying to me, because I think that it shows Rufus is becoming more like his father, a slaveholder, than a compassionate young man that Dana wants him to become. The big question now is whether Alice is carrying Hagar or not. If not, it remains to be seen if Alice and Rufus will be in a loving situation when they have a child together. Also, if it isn't a loving situation, will Dana's morals or her will to survive win? For now, it seems highly unlikely that Alice would be willing to be anywhere near Rufus. Will Dana's intervention play an important part in bringing Alice and Rufus together? So far, she's been focused on just making sure Rufus stays alive, but what if she's also supposed to help Rufus with his personal life? Dana did manage to get Rufus to listen to her previously, but now as a teenager Rufus has quite a rebellious streak, seeing Dana's reminders as threats and even threatening Dana himself. In fact, Dana can't even know if Rufus really sent a letter to Kevin, which is very worrying. Hopefully Rufus will turn out to be a good person, which I feel should take priority over everything, even ensuring the creation of Hagar. I can't wait to read on and find out what will happen.