Libra Blog
Lee Harvey Oswald
What I found most
interesting about the book is the nuanced character of Oswald. In the
beginning, I feel like DeLillo wants us to sympathize with Oswald since his
entire life has been shaped by feeling alienated and out of place. This is
shown through his inability to fit in with his classmates who bully him, and
even the military where he doesn’t fit in. Oswald also develops a disdain for
authority, and I think his inability to conform to “authority” is the driving
factor in lots of the problems he faces.
The most obvious inability to conform to authority is his
hatred towards capitalism. You can hardly blame Oswald for looking for an
alternative since growing up poor, he has been oppressed by the capitalistic
regime. His obsession with Marxist literature/ideology makes others feel he is
an outsider, fueling the feeling of separation from his peers. Because of this,
he takes more radical actions by going to the USSR.
Oswald also hates authority figures, evident in his
scuffle with his sergeant. After Oswald had been singled out many times due to
the fact that he doesn’t “dress or behave up to standards,” Oswald confronts
him. Oswald’s alienation due to his inability to conform lands him into another
problem. Although Oswald claims he wasn’t trying to purposely provoke the
officer, we also see that he’s not exactly the most reliable or objective
person. In the end, he lands in the brig, which only provokes his hatred for
authority more. Another example of his hatred for authority figures is his
encounter with law enforcement. His desire to be interrogated and investigated
by the FBI is a way for him to assert his freedom. By doing this, Oswald is
refusing to be intimidated by those in power.
Oswald is complex, a product of his experiences of
alienation and his clashes with authority. Throughout the novel, he wrestles
with his emotions, torn between his desire for independence and a sense of
belonging. His hatred towards authority figures is part of his way to express
his anger and rebel, which drives his radical actions. Although Oswald is
seemingly tough, he is fragile emotionally, which we see through his “daddy
issues”. He latches onto Konno, his KGB agent, and even people who (I think) Lee
knows is actively trying to harm him such as David Ferrie. His willingness to
overlook these ulterior motives speaks to how the sense of isolation has taken
a toll on Oswald, no matter how much he refuses to admit it.
Lee is quite oblivious and naive in the sense that he does constantly affiliate himself with dangerous people likely to set him up or cause him harm in the long run. He openly takes Ferrie's manipulation, never noticing the seeds he is planting in his head about how he is a part of something bigger and puts himself at the forefront of a plot to kill the president. In an ironic sense, Oswald is almost too trusting of anything and anyone contrarian, allowing them to control him and bend him to their bidding, which is exactly what makes Oswald the perfect figurehead for an assassin.
ReplyDeleteI also found Lee Harvey Oswalds character very interesting though the novel. I also think his constant rebellion is a result of the isolation he has felt his entire life and a result of his searching for identity. Throughout the novel Lee always seemed to be searching for a sense of purpose. This is evident through his desire to be recognized as an important figure in history. Lee wants to be recognized and treated as valuable in order to provide him with a sense of purpose and direction. I think he believes that this purpose and directive will relieve the constant feeling of isolation and loneliness that nags at him. Great post!
ReplyDeleteBeautiful post, Mason. The erraticism that Lee Harvey Oswald displays in this novel is certainly fitting of the stereotype of a man who would assassinate a world leader, as you most definitely need a swiveling moral compass to take such an action. His main character syndrome drives him to unordinary decisions, and I agree that Oswald seems completely unaware to his own lack of consistency. Great analysis, thank you!!!
ReplyDeleteI also thought that DeLillo's depiction of Lee was really interesting and he tries to paint a more complex picture, trying to understand how he would've been led into the assassination plot. He uses the historical facts given about his life and contextualizes it in a way that almost conflicts the readers. For me, I didn't think so much about Lee's childhood but his investment in communism made a lot of sense given his living situation growing up. He's constantly faced ostracization, and throughout the novel, we consistently see him talk about his "loneliness." I think I felt especially sympathetic towards his character when he was being visibly manipulated by David Ferrie and other older figures, as this was a result of abused power dynamics, Lee's "daddy issues," and complicated relationships with authority figures.
ReplyDeleteLee Harvey Oswald is definitely one of those "morally ambiguous" characters who are so common throughout historical fiction novels. A similar dynamic existed with Dana (who was put in a really crappy position), where you struggle to completely hate the character's actions because you read the whole novel in the context of their life. I feel like this conflict is more troubling in Libra, though, because Lee Harvey Oswald was an actual person. We only feel sympathy for him because of the gaps that DeLillo fills in his personal life with a made-up narrative. It's uncomfortable to feel sympathy for someone because of a made-up narrative.
ReplyDelete