Richards' new novel begins with the death of Hector, a young First Nations man, working his first labour job on a ship. He is saving to go to med school. Initially, it is suspected that Roger Savage, a white man, accidentally caused the death. Very quickly, however, people suspect that Roger – a more experienced labourer, angry that an Indian got the job over him – intentionally killed Hector. Richards weaves a plot where the reserve’s chief is sceptical of Roger’s culpability and loses the respect of his people, who realize this white man will not be charged. Here we see how the death of one man becomes a symbol of treaty and land disputes, leadership and control, media exploitation, and the power of rumour and innuendo.
Richards presents a few ideas to consider about power dynamics. The first significant theme is that identifying a person of privilege is difficult. Racial disputes between whites and First Nations people drive the book. People from both groups are victims and both are perpetrators of abuse. The story Richards presents is that anyone with power can manipulate people. This book is full of tragedy. Much of the tragedy begins with people thinking they are doing the right thing as they fight for change. Instead, villainy escalates to create new villains. A second theme that Richards presents is that it is important for privileged people to stand alongside the weak; there is not a clear formula for doing so, however. Even identifying who is weak – who deserves the support of the privileged – is complex and Richards shows that the consequences of misidentification can be dire. It is possible for a powerful but just person to become a tyrant without even knowing it.
As a “social justice Christian” – and an expat Maritimer – I found Richards’ book to be a sobering warning. Like many of the educated and elite (who are typically white) characters in Incidents in the Life of Markus Paul, I tend to jump on traditionally liberal bandwagons. Like these characters, I want to right wrongs, but am often surprised at how little I know about the fight I am in if I try to describe it. Also like many of these characters, I can become so enmeshed in doing the right thing that I don't stop to actually think about what the right thing is. Richards shows that my desire is dangerous if I am not critically engaged as I fight “the good fight.”
I was also intrigued by Richards’ demonstration of how murky the line is between justice and revenge. This demonstration is why I want to comment on his book for this blog. (I’m an avid fiction reader and prefer good fiction to any other type of writing, but don’t intend to have too many novels appear here.) All the characters see Hector’s death as tragic and everyone wants some sort of retribution. Amos Paul, the chief, personifies justice. He seems to be the most affected by Hector’s death, but also does not want to persecute Roger. If nothing else, Amos does not want to blame Roger if he is innocent. Joel Ginnish, Hector’s half-brother, personifies revenge. His brother’s death is quite simple. A white man is guilty and he won’t be prosecuted. Joel’s desire is for immediate action and Amos is simply in the way. The murkiness comes from Isaac Snow. Isaac – sure of Roger’s guilt – wants to see justice for a member of his community. It becomes easy to question his motives, however. He is a political rival to Amos and seems easily swayed by Joel. These motives are balanced against the desire to do what is right instead of only what is popular. Isaac’s own reactions contradict his other reactions. This complexity makes him the most interesting element to Incidents.
No comments:
Post a Comment