How Cat's Cradle is Postmodern

Cat's Cradle is a completely postmodern text. Vonnegut covered many postmodern subjects like religion and science.

I think the largest aspect of postmodern religion in Cat's Cradle is Bokononism. In the novel, Bokononism's creators, Bokonon and Earl McCabe, created the religion to control the island nation of San Lorenzo as a utopian project. In order to do this, the two had to recreate reality for the citizens. The religion was banned soon after by the next ruler of the island, Papa Monzano, to give its followers more reason to practice it. Bokonon was labeled an outlaw and is "pursued" by the San Lorenzan government for heresy. The religion of San Lorenzo is postmodern because it centers on the idea of objectivism. In objectivism, the only reality is what one has accepted to be the truth, even if it has been based on lies. Bokononism tells its followers to "'Live by the foma that make you brave and kind and healthy and happy'" (Bokonon, 5) For San Lorenzans, poverty will never improve, but it is by the manufacturing of reality that the government can create hope and maintain a productive nation.

The other postmodern subject in Cat's Cradle is the neutrality of science. Felix Hoenikker was the man responsible for developing the atomic bomb. It killed hundreds of thousands of people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan. Hoenikker also created ice-nine, the doomsday compound in the novel. Vonnegut centers on a key concept of science by using Hoenikker's characterization. His character was socially awkward, and cared little for his family life. The only discernible thing he truly cared for was science. This did not include its motives; it was all a game to Hoenikker. Vonnegut shows through the innocent scientist that technological developments are fundamentally impartial. It is only by human motivation that it is labeled good or evil.

Late Sir Ken Robinson

In the video lecture "Changing Education Paradigms," Sir Ken Robinson presents his view on modern education. He points out that education is too standardized, that academic ability is "making brilliant people think they are not". Robinson goes on to say that ADHD is not a medical epidemic. Rather, it is merely a result of standardized education. Like Brave New World, students are being given drugs to control their capacity to focus. Ritalin and soma are comparable because they are "anesthetizing" students.

Standardization has also created the conformity and standardization of the students. Schools' curriculum are divided into certain subjects and facilities; their standardized testing is producing students that are subject to conformity to this model of education. This is extremely similar to how the World Controllers of Brave New World "decant [their] babies as socialized human beings, as Alphas or Epsilons, as future sewage workers or future ... Directors of Hatcheries" (Huxley, 13).

The lecture also shows that in a study, 98% of a large group of children were deemed geniuses in divergent thinking. But as they aged, more of the subjects of the testing lost their genius level intellect of divergent thinking. This is because they were conditioned to think a certain way; they were educated. His evidence of conditioning children to conform with standardized information parallels what the general population of Brave New World believes. They are conditioned, starting at childhood to accept death and the caste system. By the time they are adults, they all live by the guidelines the World Controllers have laid for them. They only know promiscuity, happiness, and soma.

Brave New World Topic

Brave New World was much more interesting and entertaining than 1984 and The Tempest. I'm not completely sure what to write about, mostly because I don't have a clear idea about the prompt. Anyways, I think Brave New World illustrates the argument between totalitarianism and individual expression.

People in Huxley's book are prompted and conditioned to seek immediate satisfaction for their every little want. They are created artificially on assembly lines. Promiscuity is highly encouraged and the basic family structure is shunned from society. The World Controllers like Mustapha Mond prioritize economic stability and citizen productivity over individual humanity. To accomplish complete stability and productivity, people are kept happy by living by what are the complete opposite of today's morals. If they are still not content, the World State distributes soma to help them cope with life.

Two outside works that could work with Brave New World are 1984 and the video by Sir Ken Robinson.

1984 parallels Brave New World because of how the Party controls its populace. It does the opposite things with the same goal in mind. Big Brother keeps the people run down and tired as compared to the happy and satisfied citizens of Brave New World. They are controlled psychologically by Big Brother and the Inner Party's constant streaming of propaganda and hate. Sexuality is suppressed since it is a product of free expression. In Brave New World, the people are raised so they will live to seek happiness in its most primal form.

Robinson's "Changing Education Paradigms" shows the flaws of modern education and how it is made to streamline learning. He makes the point that "people are becoming educated", and are thinking too much in a linear form. He stresses that we need to restructure learning to encompass teaching about how children think, with divergent thinking, rather than instructing them about what to think.

Values in Brave New World

                Mond’s quote explains why the people in Brave New World are created. They are organized into the five different castes: Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons. The Alphas are bred as the most intellectually inclined group, and the Epsilons are the least developed. These Epsilons are bred only for the purpose of manual labor, and they have no objection to it. They are manipulated in the fetal stage to be born dumb and be content with their lower grade of work. This ties into how Mund describes the men that watch the wheels. They don’t know any better than what they were bred for.

                Mond addresses the students on the topic of stability by relating it to water in a pipe. He explains that strong emotion inspired by old views of families, sex, and delayed gratification of desires contradicts stability in society. In their world, words relating to family are dirty (e.g. mother, father). The people have no need for family structures since they are all test tube babies. Only the savages still retain their family structures. Their society also lacks the basic family structures because the people are supposed to adhere to promiscuous lifestyles, thus eliminating monogamy. Children are introduced to it at a young age, as two children discover “a rudimentary sexual game” (31). This follows through into adulthood as Lenina is urged by her peers to not stay with Henry Foster because long-term relationships are not favorable. Happiness is key in their society’s stability, and it is kept intact by these non-marital relationships. Without long-term relationships, people are free to fulfill their sexual desires and calm their impulses so they can remain productive citizens. The society they live in allows people to live without inhibitions so they only need to worry about the economy and their own consumerism.

Tempest Prep Write

Aime Cesaire’s A Tempest highlights the imperialist notions found in The Tempest. In discussions of postcolonial undertones, a controversial issue has been about how these messages should be interpreted. On one hand, political commentator George Will argues that works of literature should be enjoyed for its aesthetic value rather than the context that they were written in. On the other hand, professor Stephen Greenblatt disagrees because of the plethora of evidence that spells out an author’s intended purpose. Others even maintain that only the authors can tell us the real meanings of their works. However, this is impossible in Shakespeare’s case, and I believe that people need to be able to draw their own conclusions on The Tempest based on prior knowledge of the political undertones in the play.

George Will wants readers to enjoy and understand literature for what they think it is, not what the MLA says is right. To him, people should be able to interpret works the way they understand them, and political messages in readings are becoming all too apparent thanks to the educated elite. But Stephen Greenblatt defends his views and argues that it’s impossible to not take note of the imperialist messages in The Tempest. He stresses the value of the cultural heritage found in the play. In order to fully understand Shakespeare and other writers, it is important for the student to understand that Shakespeare drew upon the politics of his time to write.

I have to agree with Greenblatt on the issue. Writers are influenced by their surroundings and culture, and we should acknowledge the fact. Our interpretations just can’t be so far reaching that they alienate the reader with their ambiguity.  Nevertheless, people need to be able to base their conclusions of a work on what they understand, not what they are told to understand, like Will wants. 

Let's Stop Debating, Please!

In the two essays, George Will criticizes scholars and experts for making classic works irrelevant and difficult for the common reader by interpreting the texts as having hidden political undertones, whereas Stephen Greenblatt contests his position on the matter because the classics are saturated with them. Will writes about how William Shakespeare, Emily Dickinson, and Jane Austen's works have been interpreted by scholars to include "imperialist rape of the Third World...feminist rage"and "boiling fury about male domination" (Will, 111). Greenblatt argues that "it is very difficult to argue that The Tempest is not about imperialism," because it "is full of conspicuous allusions to contemporary debates over the project of colonization" (Greenblatt 114). 

I strongly dislike choosing sides in most situations, but in this case, I must agree more with Greenblatt. We need to look deeply into classical works and look for the author’s intended purpose, but scholars and professionals should not try to identify and create such abstract ideas as Will illustrated (albeit kinda inappropriately). What I think literature needs, like most other things, is moderation in its teachings and interpretations. I know that it’s impossible to get people to take a neutral or at least moderate stance with things like these, but I see that as maybe the most effective way to settle things. They just need to learn to compromise a little, but that’s only what I think.

I still like some of Will’s points though; I agree that over-interpreting classics makes understanding them difficult and confusing if you have little or no prior experience examining them. He tries to speak for the common person, but I don’t think he gives people enough academic credit. I think that it is relatively easy to see the messages about imperialism in The Tempest, but other works are sure to be more difficult. I can see where he comes from.

I wish I could read this a little easier

European countries presented the notion that "all races other than white were inferior or subhuman" (Ashcroft, Griffiths, and Tiftin, 236). Like Caliban, their subjugated nations were taken advantage of both economically and culturally, as the more powerful countries reaped the benefits of raw materials and the institution of European religious beliefs. He is an example of a native who is taken advantage of by a seemingly godlike European. Shakespeare created Caliban as a representation of native peoples. His position in the play is meant to provide an argument against colonization. Even though he guided Prospero around the island and showed him the "freshwater springs, the saltwater pits, the barren places and the fertile ones," Caliban is treated only as Prospero and Miranda's "horrid slave" (Shakespeare, 43-45). He was perfectly happy to remain alone on the island without European language or culture, but Prospero and Miranda thought otherwise. They could have let him live with his own interpretations of things, but they only saw him "babbling like an animal" and decided instead to enslave him (45). Caliban did not need to learn the language; he was content by himself on the island.

This parallels the Native Americans in early North America and the video. Native Americans were originally portrayed as savages with a minimal understanding of their surroundings, as portrayed in "How Hollywood Stereotyped the Native Americans". They are characterized as murderous and unintelligent. However, they were really peaceful people who lived off the land and practiced their own unique ancestral beliefs. Like the Native Americans, Caliban is easily controlled by Stephano's alcohol and kind(ish) words, but he is still referred to as an "ignorant monster" and a "drunken fish" by Trinculo (123). Shakespeare created Caliban to depict the unfortunate struggle of the colonized.

The Tempest Act I

Prospero creates his own version of the past to influence the thoughts of Miranda, Ariel, and Caliban. When he finally tells Miranda about her origins, he presents himself as the rightful Duke of Milan who was overthrown by his once trusted and loyal brother Antonio. He explains to her that Antonio and Alonso didn’t kill them because “they didn’t dare, because the people of Milan loved me too much“ (Shakespeare, 7).  It is when he includes the people’s love for him that Shakespeare hints at Prospero’s verbal manipulation. He also exalts himself by emphasizing his knowledge of magic and the arts to create an even more powerful figure in Miranda’s eyes.  Such manipulation is comparable to how the Party altered historical records to match its current goals.

He also molds his own image into one similar to Big Brother’s. Prospero manages to do this by forcibly reminding her that it was he who saved her from imprisonment in a hollow pine tree. It was his magic that made the “pine tree open and let [her] out” (13). He does the same thing as the Party by keeping him oppressed and preventing him from knowing a better life. Like the people of Oceania, Ariel feels indebted to Prospero and endures service to him.

Like the Party, Prospero controls Caliban with threats of physical torture. He keeps power over Caliban by threatening to “rack thee with old cramps, fill all thy bones with aches, make thee roar that beasts shall tremble at thy din” (17).  Caliban only knows how to comply with threats of physical pain. Prospero once treated him kindly, but after attempting to rape Miranda, Caliban lost his opportunity for a normal life. He is like Winston in the fact that the worst thing, in his mind, is physical pain. 

Socratic Circle Reflection

            After hearing the discussion in the classroom setting, I honestly can’t say that I favor a conservative leaning over a liberal standpoint in textbooks. I would however, like to make note that some of the problem comes from the textbook companies’ willingness to appease the school boards for monetary gain. They have direct control over what is written into the history books and consequently influence the subject matter that students learn. These companies should be a little more concerned with what students are being taught rather than how they can sell their books.

            There were points in the discussion that stood out and influenced my viewpoint on the matter. It was pointed out that we may be reading and studying history based on liberal views, and that Texas is just trying to restore balance. It was also noted that our generation can’t say what is right and wrong because we weren’t there during past events in history. These comments helped me shape my own thoughts on the subject.

            I don’t have a problem with the Texas board of education adding more to the curriculum, but they shouldn’t be removing anything. They also shouldn’t let political alliances corrupt the information feed in schools. In my opinion, everything in history is important, good or bad; it helps us learn from our mistakes and thereby improve on our shortcomings. I now believe that in order to have a fully balanced and unbiased history book, textbooks must include every aspect of every historical event, no matter how it was influenced by politics. An unadulterated record of history would let people see a more truthful story of human relations.

Was this homework?

Elephants!