Cat’s Cradle: Kurt Vonnegut’s Commentary on Science, Politics, and Religion in the Early 1960s

Joseph Sprunt

Mr. O’Brien

English IV

3/7/13

Cat’s Cradle: Kurt Vonnegut’s Commentary on Science, Politics, and Religion in the Early 1960s

            Cat’s Cradle, by Kurt Vonnegut, was published in 1963 – a time in America of heightened Cold War tension and paranoia, of celebrating scientific and technological accomplishments, and of an upsurge in critique of traditional Western religious norms and church policies. Vonnegut’s novel satirizes these themes in his characteristic hyperbolic manner, combining dark humor (the end of the world with water turned instantly to ice, no less!) with a lighter form of social commentary I find rather amusing.

Personally, I am not a religious person. I was baptized as a child and did grow up going to a Catholic Church service every Sunday and attending religion classes once a week and, to be completely honest, I did not really find much salvation in “celebrating God’s glory.” So, at the beginning of high school, I made the decision not to continue my Catholic “studies.” As for my political views, I find it hard to associate myself with one of the two mainstream political parties (I see many problems in both though I generally favor the democrats). I do consider myself a progressive (although this positive connotation of this term has been almost turned into a pejorative by the hard right wing in American politics – an irony Vonnegut would appreciate). Science is proven harder for me to form an opinion on. Many great things were accomplished through science—from cures for many diseases, to moon and Martian landings, to deep understanding of the laws of nature. However, advances in science have also led to profoundly worrying applications (notably nuclear weapons), not all of which are intended for destructive purpose but like ice-nine actually originate with a beneficial promise.

            In Cat’s Cradle, Vonnegut pokes fun, rather cynically, at religion. The fictitious figure of Bokonon strikes me as a kind of comic demagogue/evangelist who is performing a mass social psychology experiment on the hapless population of San Lorenzo. The irony is that all the people of San Lorenzo devote their whole lives to the practice of Bokonism but Bokonism itself is completely fake. I am not sure what Vonnegut’s religious views but Bokonism is surely a metaphor for another religion (possibly Christianity). This novel has not really affected my views on religion because they seem to be quite consistent with Vonnegut’s skepticism and parody. It did raise my awareness of the arbitrary nature of religion and how easily and effectively people may be manipulated, and I have to laugh at loud at the notion that Utopia is in fact illegal.

            Vonnegut also mocks politics. We see the corrupt nature of politics on San Lorenzo. The way Presidents are chosen seems to be completely random; they are mired in unwillingness to act and have no real desire to move the nation forward. John debates whether to make Bokonism legal or not but decides that he cannot provide the resources that would be required if Bokonism were legal; this sounds to me like national healthcare or fiscal policy today. It seems that politicians are so afraid of moving away from the established routines, orders, and values that it is impossible for us, as a nation, to progress.

            Vonnegut’s commentary on science is perhaps the most interesting. Vonnegut uses the fictitious concept of ice-nine to comment on the ridiculous nature of the arms race that was going on between the United States and the Soviet Union during the early 1960s, the time of the Cuban missile crisis when the Cold War was reaching an even higher level of tension. However, my own view is that throughout the last decades, great progress has been made in the elimination of the threat of a nuclear catastrophe or other devastating events that could be enabled by scientific advancements put to destructive ends. Perhaps Vonnegut’s irony is slightly outdated because the world has made progress in terms of lessening the likelihood of a cataclysmic man-made termination. On the other hand, in my lifetime Vonnegut’s view of the “end of the world” could be replaced by the threat of a series of smaller scale incidents (terrorists acts leading to larger conflict) or even a slower demise through global heating. Since I am only eighteen, I am not prepared – yet – to obsess over fatalism; I feel that science can solve the problems science creates.

            This novel was a sophisticated, profound, and amusing look at science, politics, and religion and did provide me with a new perspective on each one of the subjects. However, it did not radically alter my views on any of them.