I Will Wear a Camera
From the
beginning of Libra, Marguerite was always a character that struck me. While
for most of the book she remains out of sight and mind, when she does enter the
story, it is powerful and incredibly interesting.
In the
beginning sections of the novel, we get a glimpse of Lee’s childhood, and
Marguerite is undoubtedly an important part of this. Lee gets called to court
for truancy, and his mother’s voice testifies to the judge. She tells the Judge
a story about his life, trying to explain that her child isn’t a delinquent by highlighting
all of the great parts of him and the things that make him just like any other
kid.
Marguerite
shows up a few more times in the middle part of the novel. Upon originally
reading these scenes, they can seem random and unexplained, but after reaching
the end of the novel, I believe that they are part of her testimony at the end
of the book after the JFK and Lee are both dead. I think her narrative voice throughout
the book as this very specific role where she is trying to describe Lee to people,
usually in court, as well as understand him herself is a fascinating literary
device and I think it sort of brings the whole book together.
Throughout
Lee’s life and throughout Libra, Marguerite is always there, trying to
figure out the real story, and trying to understand and justify Lee’s life
experiences and actions. She is not afraid to ask questions and demand
information and has a desire to know exactly what the real story is and why it
happened. Sometimes this demanding curiosity and pursuit of the truth can go
too far, especially as it presents for her son when he is still alive. I can imagine
that having a mother like Marguerite that was constantly trying to figure out
the real picture and defend me against the secret agents that had been
exploiting me secretly for my whole life could feel lonely and frustrating. I
suppose maybe all her conspiracies are true and it would be nice to have
someone seeing through the lies, but if she’s completely wrong, it would probably
not be a great experience to have your mother not let go of these ideas.
I think it’s
probably somewhere in between Marguerite having completely unfounded, ridiculous
ideas and being the only one that truly is seeing the full story. I think her
rejection of believing everything just as it comes to her is very useful, and many
conspiracy theorists about JFK behave similarly, without the personal emotional
connection she has. However, there are also times when it seems to go to far,
and her fascinations do more harm than good.
Overall, I really
liked the literary device of having Marguerite kind of weave parts of the story
with her camera, starting with the truancy case in Lee’s childhood up until the
hearings for the assassination of President JFK by the same son of hers.
It is apt that you describe Marguerite's "narrative voice" within this novel, even though the book is (almost entirely) narrated in third person. Marguerite is indeed the only character to *narrate* in the first person (aside from excerpts from Lee's Historic Diary and postcards home and other documents). She addresses the reader as "your honor," which also has a weird effect, as if we are inherently in a position to "judge" her testimony. DeLillo draws heavily on her *extensive* testimony to the Warren Commission (mostly delivered directly to Chief Justice Earl Warren), and she refers to him as "your honor" throughout. But it's a neat effect within this novel, making *us* the judges of Lee's character. This is a boy who taught himself chess at the kitchen table! Do we "see the struggle"?
ReplyDelete