So I just finished the book, and I have to say that even though the book was about the assassination of Kennedy, Kennedy wasn't actually really too much a part of the book. Because of how much build up suspense to the actual shooting, it seemed to say how the actual shooting and the person being shot was not actually as important as the build up to the shooting. I felt like this book was more fiction than history.
I believe that Delillo should have provided more emphasis on Kennedy. There are many different perspectives given by different characters in the story and I just feel that a perspective given by Kennedy would have provided a different feel to the story which would lead to a more complex story. From what I have read in Delillo’s story, I almost feel no regret to the death of Kennedy, which I feel is something that Delillo does not want. However an argument to my opinion is that if Delillo does give a perspective of Kennedy which ultimately ends in his death, this touching subject could stir mixed emotions with the reader.
This book does seem to already play with the mixed emotions of readers. Before reading this book I would have definitely thought that Lee was the bad guy and Kennedy was the good guy. However now that I read Delillo’s take on the story, I kind of feel a little sorry for Lee. Ya, there were some times where I thought Lee was kind of stupid and arrogant like when he believed his diary was to be read by the masses. But, the way the book plays out I can’t help feel kinda bad for Lee for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It almost seems that Lee is a victim in this story. I guess that Delillo is maybe trying to say that there is actually no good guy or bad guy, but something influenced by something we just can't control.
It's true that Kennedy lingers in the background throughout the novel--characters from many different circles and plotlines talk *about* him, we know what a polarizing figure he is, we know why some people hate him and some are fascinated by him--but we never really see JFK first-hand, as a "character." This seems to me consistent with DeLillo's purposes in the novel: especially for readers of his generation (and this is published in 1988), there would have been no real need to depict Kennedy directly, as he *was* real in the way that ubiquitous public figures are real. In a sense, DeLillo isn't really interested in JFK as a man--he's a *president*, a public image, always mediated by photographs and film and reflective of people's hopes and desires. Oswald doesn't shoot the *man*, he shoots the *image* as it exists in everyone's mind. JFK is quite literally larger than life in the world of the novel, and the author is shining a light on this complex web of underground associations and relationships that are less visible on the "surface" of history (where JFK is prominent).
ReplyDelete