Bill Feng
English IV
Mr. O’Brien
3/6/2012
The primary focus of Cat’s Cradle is Kurt Vonnegut’s ideas, or more likely mockings, on science, religion, and society. Since they are the central component of humans’ spiritual world, Cat's Cradle emphasized the negative aspect of humans through humor and metaphor, attempting to call for the collective “awakening” of all human beings.
English IV
Mr. O’Brien
3/6/2012
Cat’s Cradle Did Not Change This Title
The primary focus of Cat’s Cradle is Kurt Vonnegut’s ideas, or more likely mockings, on science, religion, and society. Since they are the central component of humans’ spiritual world, Cat's Cradle emphasized the negative aspect of humans through humor and metaphor, attempting to call for the collective “awakening” of all human beings.
As this fiction is structurally built with parables and poetry resembling the Bible, it displays an image of a distant ancient history, or rather an “anti-history”. However, unlike the Bible, Bokononism is the “true things being shameless lies” (8). With such mocking tone of Bokononism throughout the fiction, Vonnegut attempted to emphasize the hypocrisy and inability of religion. Furthermore, he concluded religion with the metaphorical “cat’s cradle”, stating that religion creates new lies to cover old ones, while shackling people with unreal “karasses”. Overall, Vonnegut utilized Bokononism to hint the mental confinement and poisoning that religion radicalism brings about towards the society. Obviously, most readers would reevaluate their current paradigm due to their religious nature. They would question the foundation of religion, and probably adopt skepticism. Others may regard this fiction as blaspheme against their belief. With all such controversy apart, my neutral stance was absolutely unchanged by it. I regard discussions on the existence of a deity or deities as worthless, as it has resulted in persecution, social conflicts, and even wars. My values are relatively simple, which is that my morals and values should not be governed by minds of other people or groups, but only facts. In light of this statement, any attempt to apply manipulation on my mental being will not be accepted. Therefore, this fiction serves merely as a conventional negative argument on religion, instead of a guidance for reshaping me as a member of the society.
Vonnegut’s denouncement of science was another thesis of Cat’s Cradle through the creation of the anti-hero Felix Hoenikker. He warned us that unlimited exploitation of scientific technology would result in the destruction of human beings. Apparently, he disgusted the world’s emphasis on science, since it affects the development of humanities. Vonnegut alluded towards notable inventors by naming the Hoenikkers: Newt for Newton and Frank for Franklin. Therefore, by making Frank and Newt abnormal human beings, Vonnegut pointed out the absurdity of scientific inventions. Just as the title of chapter 12 - “end of the world delight” suggests, people tend to laugh and lament at the same time when they are facing such devastating scene. Above all, Vonnegut’s attitude of universal mockery on both religion and science highlights his discontent on the current society. Thus, Cat’s Cradle could be regarded as his attempt to “awaken” the petrified world. I attempt to avoid such attitude. By denouncing or mocking the society, one puts oneself above it, acquiring merely mental comfort. After all, the factual impact of an individual's cynicism on the society is negligible. Vonnegut did not “awaken” the society, as the majority still carried on hypocritical religions and atrocious sciences. Hence I regard any behavior bending the majority to an individual’s will as unreal and absurd. Furthermore, as I am in a relatively good condition, I feel fulfilled of the society. It is only natural for me to appreciate it and carry on my current morals, values, and philosophy.
Vonnegut’s denouncement of science was another thesis of Cat’s Cradle through the creation of the anti-hero Felix Hoenikker. He warned us that unlimited exploitation of scientific technology would result in the destruction of human beings. Apparently, he disgusted the world’s emphasis on science, since it affects the development of humanities. Vonnegut alluded towards notable inventors by naming the Hoenikkers: Newt for Newton and Frank for Franklin. Therefore, by making Frank and Newt abnormal human beings, Vonnegut pointed out the absurdity of scientific inventions. Just as the title of chapter 12 - “end of the world delight” suggests, people tend to laugh and lament at the same time when they are facing such devastating scene. Above all, Vonnegut’s attitude of universal mockery on both religion and science highlights his discontent on the current society. Thus, Cat’s Cradle could be regarded as his attempt to “awaken” the petrified world. I attempt to avoid such attitude. By denouncing or mocking the society, one puts oneself above it, acquiring merely mental comfort. After all, the factual impact of an individual's cynicism on the society is negligible. Vonnegut did not “awaken” the society, as the majority still carried on hypocritical religions and atrocious sciences. Hence I regard any behavior bending the majority to an individual’s will as unreal and absurd. Furthermore, as I am in a relatively good condition, I feel fulfilled of the society. It is only natural for me to appreciate it and carry on my current morals, values, and philosophy.
From a literal perspective, Cat’s Cradle is a success. Its contribution towards American literature did create a new genre, thereby substantially affected subsequent literal pieces. However, Vonnegut did not fulfill his objective of changing the society. The society is a collective being, absorbing all controversy over issues while staying complete neutral. I appreciate and fundamentally concur with this great property of the society. Therefore, Cat’s Cradle did not change me as a person, just as it did not change the society.
I like how Bill used many references to the book to support his own beliefs on this topic. He managed to shape the book to reinforce his own ideas about the debate between science and religion. Bill also made this essay very personal by including his own opinions of the matter and some very strong opinions towards the book. However, it was mentioned that Vonnegut was trying to change society and that he failed at this. But did he ? Like you said he created a new genre of writing, a new perspective on old ideas. A perspective which his adopted by many people today, he may not of changed society but he may have inspired many influential people to pursue this idea further.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with Bill's personal views more than I do most, I want to know if there are actually real life examples. I understand we had to relate it to the book, but the book is fiction, and I would like to see more of a real life stance on this. And to Charnley (above), I don't know if Vonnegut did or did not change society. Replicating us, I would give Vonnegut a "C", not a fail, but not the best way of doing it. And as for changing the real world views, I would say he did nothing. Personally this book didn't move me at all.
ReplyDelete