Skip to main content

why do the main characters keep killing their babies

Beloved and White Boy Shuffle are really different books in a number of ways. They're set more than 100 years removed from each other, and it's hard to draw many similarities between the main characters of each, Sethe and Gunnar. Sethe is an outcast - Gunnar, a celebrity. Sethe lives in rural Ohio - Gunnar lives in LA. I could go on and on. However, at the end of White Boy Shuffle there was a scene that I felt connected Sethe and Gunnar very closely.

Gunnar and Yoshiko have their first child towards the end of White Boy Shuffle, Naomi. She's about two years old at the end of the book, and we last see the Kaufmans awaiting a nuclear attack from the government. The fate of Naomi seemed very similar to me to the fate of Beloved: both killed by their parents (though Naomi a bit less directly) as toddlers to escape a life of oppression. But they don't get a chance at life because of this, and you have to wonder if it's even the right of Gunnar and Sethe to take the lives away from their children without giving them a shot.

Then, we have to wonder if it's even our place to judge or get mad at Gunnar and Sethe for choosing to kill their children. They know better than anyone what the lives of their kids would be like based on their own unique experiences, and if they truly believe that death is better than life for their kids, we have to trust them.

It's so complicated for me to comprehend, because no matter how much I think about these books I can't ever fully understand the life experiences of either Sethe or Gunnar. That they think death is the best option for their children is really jarring, but also a strong commentary on the black experience in America.

Comments

  1. I can see where you're coming from but I actually see the two situations having important differences. For Sethe in Beloved, she is motivated by the fear of her children being put back into slavery and it is ultimately her motherly love that allows her to "go against" morals and try to murder her children. However, Gunnar is in a different situation. How I interpreted his decision is that he is not motivated by fear but the idea that it is pointless to continue living in a world where his entire personality becomes molded to fit into the idea of entertainment for the Whites. I feel that neither Sethe or Gunnar believe that death for their children is the best option but that it is truly the only option left.

    A point you make that I agree with is the fact that the reader cannot judge either Sethe or Gunnar. In both novels, the idea of morality is so intertwined with their experiences that we are reading about and the contrast with our perspective on the topic. Of course, from an outside point of view, neither Gunnar or Sethe's choice seems like the "right" option, but because we are in a situation where we understand them, or at least think we understand, we are unable to make a clear decision.

    ReplyDelete
  2. One of the important differences between these two situations is that Sethe is motivated by fear and Gunnar is motivated by resignation. Perhaps this signifies the differences in the times because for Sethe, slavery's horror has been extremely present in her life as a pressing issue that haunts her for life, while in the post hip-hop era, Gunnar faces relatively minuscule things that cumulatively wear him out and make him feel like he can't do anything to get ahead. It's a commentary about the difference in time period.
    Another important difference is that Sethe is going against what the people in her community deem as right, and Gunnar seems to be defining what the hillside community thinks is right. I am not sure what the significance of this difference is but it seems relevant to me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another thing is that this whole suicide movement that Gunnar started is more of a protest while Sethe killed her baby in a moment of fear. Its not like Naomi is going to be sent off to a plantation (though she would experience some tough times in the future). Sethe did what she thought would protect her child. I'm not quite sure of Gunnar's reasoning, but there is definitely a difference. Its the difference of knowing that something horrible would happen to your child if you didn't take action right then and that something might happen to your child in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that while both Sethe and Gunnar want the best for their children, their thought processes about their decisions are different. Sethe acted very on-the-fly, since she had to leap into action and make a quick decision about whether death or slavery would be the better option for her children. Gunnar had a lot of time to consider his choice, and Naomi's death seems to be more lumped in with the rest of the movement rather than a specific decision to spare her pain. It's more complicated with Gunnar, because he swims back instead of drowning in the ocean for Yoshiko and his unborn child. He's willing to postpone his death for their sake, yet is fine all three of them dying.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree that there are some similarities between Naomi and Beloved’s situations, but I don’t think I would call what Gunnar is doing “killing” Naomi. While in Beloved’s case, it’s a clear instance of Sethe murdering her child, I think things are a bit more complicated with Naomi. Gunnar isn’t actually killing her; he’s just not actively trying to prevent the government from killing her. He’s standing on the sidelines and watching as events take their course. In some ways, Naomi could be safer than she would be somewhere else. There’s no actual guarantee that the government will drop the bomb, and in the meantime, everyone is living in harmony and without overarching racial dynamics. In any other situation, Gunnar could have to worry about gang violence, hate crimes, and a million other situations that could arise based on his race, environment, or social status. At least here, Naomi is perfectly safe as long as the government doesn’t drop the bomb. The only reason it seems so much worse is that the bomb is a physical threat that is both known and expected, unlike the others which are often hidden or obscured in various ways.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The narrative of TWBS isn't realistic, but I'd imagine that if the goverment is willing to bomb one of their own cities to kill Black people, then they will probabl continue to persucute people. Naomi doesn't have much a future in this America. However, I don't think it's Gunnars call to wait for the bomb with his family. If he's protesting, there are other ways to do that without putting his own daughter in danger. He shou;d've tried to do his best to help Naomi.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How Disney perpetuates voodoo stereotypes

In the opening chapters of Mumbo Jumbo , we've been introduced to Papa DaBas, a voodoo priest. In class we talked a bit about the largely negatively perception of voodoo in America. This immediately made me think of the Disney princess film, The Princess and the Frog . This movie is set in New Orleans, and follows a princess who falls in love, blah blah blah...but the villain is a voodoo-practicing witch doctor, Dr. Facilier.  I found it really interesting to look back at Dr. Facilier's character after discussing the American perception of voodoo, because Dr. Facilier is portrayed as a man of pure evil (here's a picture if you haven't seen the movie to show how creepy he is). His soul belongs to evil loas (his "friends on the other side", as he calls them), and he uses their power to achieve his greedy  goals, convincing the loas to continue working with him by feeding them the souls of innocent victims. He's manipulative and extremely powerful.  ...

Paul D and Sethe's shared trauma

Paul D and Sethe have an extremely complicated relationship that constantly morphs and shifts throughout  Beloved . They spent lots of time at Sweet Home together, and therefore have an established emotional bond. Though a more physical aspect of their relationship develops, the glue holding them together is their shared trauma of living at Sweet Home and of their respective escapes. Generally speaking, relationships held together primarily by shared traumatic experiences are fragile and unstable: Paul D and Sethe's relationship is no exception. Though they understand each other's experiences with slavery, they have little else in common. Crucially, they haven't seen each other in eighteen years, and there are significant gaps in their knowledge what has happened in the other's life in the nearly two decades since their last encounter. Most importantly, Paul D is unaware of what Sethe did in the shed on that fateful day when schoolmaster came to 124. With the presen...

Final thoughts

 Before I get into this, I want to start by pointing out that Jill was #1 on my most likely to die list, and she is the one who died. It feels wrong to congratulate myself, but I am a little bit proud. The ending was quite satisfying. It felt almost too good and peaceful for the end of such a wild and tragic novel. Nearly the entire group survived, they moved on from their ghosts of the past, and they have great resources that they can begin their Earthseed community with. I'm a little upset that Lauren is still in a relationship with Bankole, but it's good that there are so many relationships within their community as they plan for the future. The most surprising part of the ending was when Lauren discovered that Greyson, Emery, and their kids are all sharers. I was not expecting this at all, because sharing was Lauren's most unique trait. However, it does alienate her less from the rest of the group, and it makes the former slaves more united with the rest of the group. T...