Examining Lee in Libra

             In Libra, the reader experiences two different story lines, both running parallel to each other. One of these story lines, that of Lee Harvey Oswald, provides an extremely compelling view of one of the most despised men in United States history. As a reader, we get to experience Lee’s most formative years in first hand, and we get to see some of his most important experiences. We see very quickly where the some of the origins of his heinous act come from.

             However, I would like to take some of these experiences in a slightly different angle. I believe (hot take alert) that we see evidence in Lee’s personality that are eerily comparable to that of revolutionaries such as Napoleon. In Napoleon’s formative years, he himself was bullied and often demasculinized at the expense of others. This stirred a deep sense of resentment, which ultimately manifested in his narcissistic and controlling rule of the French Empire.

Admittedly, we don’t quite see the same level of suppressed resentment from Lee Harvey Oswald. But I believe there is clear evidence of a similar psychological maneuvering around some of his abuses. Take, for example, the scene at the air force base. While he is chastised for his knowledge of the U-2 fighter jet, he tells those harassing him to “read a book”.  Rather than refusing to respond and letting the anger simmer deep within, he decides to use the one tool he has to fight back: knowledge. Although (in my opinion) he sounds snobbish, we can see some similar traits of self-superiority that leaders such as Napoleon often channel on their way to the top.

However, his antagonistic personality may make a much clearer connection between him and other revolutionaries. Take, for example the first time we meet Lee. He’s been beaten up by a white racist for sitting in the back of a bus. Whether he genuinely believes in Civil Rights or just wants to make a scene is hard to distinguish, yet his fearlessness of discourse is hard to ignore.  Many of those who have taken absolute power (Stalin, Napoleon, etc)have at least one bold and daring act that they become famous for before they took power to win over the people they end up mercilessly controlling. 

I also think it’s important to note that these similarities are not merely accidental. Lee Harvey Oswald has deliberately sculpted his personality (to a degree), to fit the mold of a traditional revolutionary. He does this in two major ways. The first is his infatuation with being incarcerated. He appears to show affection for jail, and regards it as a formative time which can serve as a catalyst for the transformation from a disgruntled member of the proletariat into an authoritative figure destined to claim power.

Within this transformation, however, there is also a second part to the change: the name. By adopting the secondary name Hidell, he provides himself a nickname that he likens to Stalin's name, meaning “man of steel”. Although this doesn’t necessarily have the same effect, we see another way he attempts to emulate his idols to further himself down the path of revolution. 

As you can see, although it may not be a perfect fit, the reader can see some evidence of Lee Harvey Oswald and his radical views beginning to lead him toward a dangerous path. I do want to leave you with a radical, yet sensible idea. By killing the US president, Lee Harvey Oswald may have prevented himself from making an even more revolutionary impact on American society as a whole.