It seems that our stopping point for the first week of reading the Turner Diaries was the perfect break point – right before the trauma (being arrested, beaten and tortured for a year) that cements Earl’s disassociation. The issues of sexuality that so struck me while reading the first part of the Turner Diaries seemed to fall away given the massive, gruesome scale of the violence perpetrated by the Organization and Earl himself (though it was certainly still evident in statements such as “womanly handwringing” (77)). The transformation that Earl goes through is quite disturbing. When the novel begins, it is clear that Earl already has the “dissociated and dualistic mind of a paranoid fundamentalist” as Whitney discussed in her post last week. However, the fact that another trauma can further this dissociation was almost unthinkable – until it happened. As Earl himself says, “Identity under identity under identity – I’ve almost forgotten who Earl Turner is or what he looks like” (108). It is this dissociation which allows Earl to put his life below the aims of the Organization/Order, saying “I have never expected to survive the struggle in which we are now engaged” (99). Indeed, the only possible impediment for Earl laying down his life for the Organization/Order is Katharine, whom he is separated from most of the time after his escape from jail furthering his dissociative behavior. Katherine’s death removes this last impediment, though as Earl says “We are willing to take as many casualties as necessary – just so the System takes proportionally more” (191). Despite his feelings for her, Katherine is just another one of these casualties. The Organization has clearly become Earl’s religion, as he entrusts his “everlasting life” to the Order as he heads into the “last hours of [his] physical existence” (202).
Given the film Jonestown the cult-like features of the Organization seemed quite obvious: the grueling work schedule that leaves Earl and his fellow members with no time to think or sleep, the “indoctrination” of new members and recruits and the community enforced regulations on actions, including the ability to leave the group. While Earl’s transformation is understandable given his starting point, the community enforced regulation and later, community committed violence is even more disturbing. The level of fear the people feel and the System’s inability to protect them inspires at least acceptance, if not an embrace, of the Organization’s racist, sexist, horrifyingly brutal program. Is this really how such a violent revolution would be met? It is unfortunate that the lessons of history have taught us that, at least sometimes, the answer is yes. Indeed, with the stakes at the apocalyptic level as they are in this novel, it becomes easier to understand. How can we avoid framing conflicts in apocalyptic terms? If we cannot, how can we use such stakes to inspire compromise and cooperation rather than conflict and violence?
Hi Kaitlyn,
The question you pose is such a crucial one: “How can we avoid framing conflicts in apocalyptic terms?” In my view, there are a number of key thinkers in American history who have done so and it’s as vital for us to find the elements of the non-apocalyptic way of thinking as it is to discern the apocalyptic ones that you have astutely pointed out here. “The Turner Diaries” is useful in putting them into relief, since its biases are so blatant.
Are there any writers, thinkers, public figures that come to mind who represent a non-apocalyptic mode of thought for you? And, if so, what are the characteristics of it?
I also was struck by the quote you used from page 108 about Earl’s layered identities. The comment works as a good metaphor for what is going on with Earl’s immersion into the Order’s goals. It was obvious to me too, that the Organization is reminiscent of the cult that developed in Jonestown. The way the Organization has a hold over its members becomes increasingly evident in Earl’s entries, which move more and more toward lengthy descriptions of missions, tactics, and work to be done rather than an account of his feelings or reflections. There is no real personal insight into Earl’s mind, aside from his reflections on Katherine. It’s interesting that without close reading we think we’re seeing the journal of a free-thinking man, when, in actuality we are reading the regurgitation of indoctrinated and dissociated thoughts. I think the ease with which the true “source” of the journal is lost speaks to the frightening truth about the way that change comes about through radical revolution-people fail to “closely read” what is going on around them, and the most horrifying and violent methods/ideas have the chance to become reality before anyone has a chance to think for themselves.
I don’t know if any specific figures come to mind – certainly in our current political environment we are in the unfortunate position where there is a great ideological divide that encourages dualistic thinking when in fact the population itself is fairly moderate. It seems much easier to think of examples of prominent figures who DID frame issues in apocalyptic, dualistic terms. Or perhaps this says something about the prevalence of this type of thinking in American society and culture. Whitney and I have remarked repeatedly since the beginning of this course that we can see the apocalypse everywhere! Part of this is surely us reading too much into things given our current immersion in the course, but I think a large part of it is just its overwhelming presence. As for the characteristics of non-apocalyptic thinking, I think those are easier to try to discern, given all that we have been studying the past two months. Most importantly, conflict doesn’t need to be “the end of the world” – it needs to be a chance to analyze and understand the source of the conflict, and find a solution that can be satisfy all parties, with the future possibility of modification and compromise (because there IS a future!).