Questioning Mortality in Never Let Me Go
Kazuo Ishiguro's novel Never Let Me Go is a complicated book that addresses issues such as technology, medicine, and humanity. While Ishiguro makes compelling points about each of these topics, I was most drawn to the questions he poses about mortality. The novel takes place in a world where humans are being cloned and the clones are raised as organ factories. Each clone is brought up to be a healthy donor and a care keeper for other donors. They simply donate each of their organs until they die, or complete. It's fascinating to think that one day we might have no shortage of resources for those who are sick and in need of help. However, this novel also truly made me think about what it would be like to live your life knowing that your only purpose in the world is to die.
courtesy of Masako Kubo
All of this made me think-- would I rather know that my only purpose was to be someone else's organ farm, or would I rather think that I lead a normal life? I was first introduced to this question when I read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. That novel is actually similar to Never Let Me Go in a lot of ways. The less valued members of society are left in the dark about certain injustices, but they're content because they don't know any better.
Madam claims that other clones were "reared in deplorable conditions, conditions...Hailsham students could hardly imagine" (261). If this is the case, then it's plausible that they left the Hailsham students ignorant purely to keep them content. If a population is completely unaware of injustice, then they have no reason to complain or rebel.
On the other hand, maybe it really is better to be ignorant. It's easy to say that you would rather have full knowledge of your situation, but in the end, everybody just wants to be happy. I still haven't quite decided what I believe myself. I hate the idea of being taken advantage of, but if I don't know that I am being taken advantage of, does it really matter?
And while the Hailsham students don't know the extent of their situation, they do know pretty much exactly when and how they're going to die. Perhaps this is why they really don't seem too bothered by their own mortality. Certainly part of the reason that humans fear death so much is that it's this huge unknown variable in our lives. In fact, one of the only times that the students appear to be nervous about the idea is when Tommy is preparing for his fourth donation. He claims that "if you knew for certain you'd complete, it'd be easier. But they never tell us for sure" (279). He isn't positive he'll survive his fourth donation or not, and at last he is apprehensive about the whole process.
Vanderbilt University graduate student Matthew Eatough addresses this indifference in his essay "The Time That Remains: Organ Donation, Temporal Duration, and Bildung in Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go". He argues that the student's apathy isn't a result of ignorance but rather a choice to focus on different aspects of their lives. Eatough declares that "by centering her narrative on this rapidly-passing world, Kathy refuses to acknowledge that her impending death has greater priority over her emotions than friendship, say, or cherished memories". While it can appear that the students are being misled, maybe they're just choosing to remember the more meaningful interactions that they have with other people.
Perhaps Ishiguro wrote Never Let Me Go not as a depressing science fiction story but as a call to all of us. It's easy to focus on impending doom and negativity, but there's so much more to be grateful for. Even though the students were imprisoned their whole childhoods at Hailsham, that also gave them the opportunity to form lasting bonds with the other students. Even though working as a carer can be bleak and heartbreaking, Kathy appreciates the chance to help others and watch over them towards the end of their lives.
Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy Courtesy of DNA Films
I think that it's okay to have varying opinions on our own mortality. Some people don't mind the idea of death, and some people would rather just not think about it at all. Some people like to plan ahead, and some people prefer to live in the moment. I don't even think that Ishiguro takes a stance on all of these complicated questions. Often times media is created purely to make people think, and that's certainly what this novel accomplished.
My initial question was this: is it better to be blissfully aware of your own fate, or to know your own mortality and be miserable? At this point, I'm still not totally sure where I stand. What I have realized is that we need to focus less on negativity and more on the relationships that we do have.
It seems grim to experience the world but also always have your fate in the back of your mind. Yes, normal humans know what's going to happen to us, but the subject is so taboo that it's easy to ignore. As I read Never Let Me Go, something that stood out to me was the attitude that the students have towards "completion". They know that it's the end of the line, but they really don't seem to be bothered or scared by it. They reminisce about old friends and usually end the conversation with something like "I heard about Chrissie. I heard she completed during her second donation" (Ishiguro 225). Afterwards, they move on. After all,
that's what's normal for them.
All of this made me think-- would I rather know that my only purpose was to be someone else's organ farm, or would I rather think that I lead a normal life? I was first introduced to this question when I read Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. That novel is actually similar to Never Let Me Go in a lot of ways. The less valued members of society are left in the dark about certain injustices, but they're content because they don't know any better.
courtesy of Harper Collins Publishers
While the government in Brave New World does this for an ultra-efficient society, the motivations of the leaders in Never Let Me Go are less clear. Towards the end of the novel, Tommy and Kathy finally find out why their childhood at Hailsham was the way that it was.
Madame argues that "[they] sheltered [the students] during those years, and [they] gave [them] [their] childhoods" (268). Maybe it was better that the students didn't know how society really viewed them, but in my opinion, there was a more sinister motivation.
Madam claims that other clones were "reared in deplorable conditions, conditions...Hailsham students could hardly imagine" (261). If this is the case, then it's plausible that they left the Hailsham students ignorant purely to keep them content. If a population is completely unaware of injustice, then they have no reason to complain or rebel.
On the other hand, maybe it really is better to be ignorant. It's easy to say that you would rather have full knowledge of your situation, but in the end, everybody just wants to be happy. I still haven't quite decided what I believe myself. I hate the idea of being taken advantage of, but if I don't know that I am being taken advantage of, does it really matter?
And while the Hailsham students don't know the extent of their situation, they do know pretty much exactly when and how they're going to die. Perhaps this is why they really don't seem too bothered by their own mortality. Certainly part of the reason that humans fear death so much is that it's this huge unknown variable in our lives. In fact, one of the only times that the students appear to be nervous about the idea is when Tommy is preparing for his fourth donation. He claims that "if you knew for certain you'd complete, it'd be easier. But they never tell us for sure" (279). He isn't positive he'll survive his fourth donation or not, and at last he is apprehensive about the whole process.
Vanderbilt University graduate student Matthew Eatough addresses this indifference in his essay "The Time That Remains: Organ Donation, Temporal Duration, and Bildung in Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go". He argues that the student's apathy isn't a result of ignorance but rather a choice to focus on different aspects of their lives. Eatough declares that "by centering her narrative on this rapidly-passing world, Kathy refuses to acknowledge that her impending death has greater priority over her emotions than friendship, say, or cherished memories". While it can appear that the students are being misled, maybe they're just choosing to remember the more meaningful interactions that they have with other people.
Perhaps Ishiguro wrote Never Let Me Go not as a depressing science fiction story but as a call to all of us. It's easy to focus on impending doom and negativity, but there's so much more to be grateful for. Even though the students were imprisoned their whole childhoods at Hailsham, that also gave them the opportunity to form lasting bonds with the other students. Even though working as a carer can be bleak and heartbreaking, Kathy appreciates the chance to help others and watch over them towards the end of their lives.
Kathy, Ruth, and Tommy Courtesy of DNA Films
I think that it's okay to have varying opinions on our own mortality. Some people don't mind the idea of death, and some people would rather just not think about it at all. Some people like to plan ahead, and some people prefer to live in the moment. I don't even think that Ishiguro takes a stance on all of these complicated questions. Often times media is created purely to make people think, and that's certainly what this novel accomplished.
My initial question was this: is it better to be blissfully aware of your own fate, or to know your own mortality and be miserable? At this point, I'm still not totally sure where I stand. What I have realized is that we need to focus less on negativity and more on the relationships that we do have.
Personally, I would rather be blissfully aware of my own fate. However, being a the normal human being that I am, I am fully aware of my mortality and it doesn't bother me. I think the answer to your initial question is a matter of personal opinion for each individual person. Regardless of what each person's answer is, I totally agree that the important thing is to focus less on negativity and more on the relationships that we do have.
ReplyDeleteMany humans, I believe, fear death because of the idea that they do not know what is going to happen. The fear of the unknown. Personally, I am okay with it because I believe it gives opportunity to do good. A chance to live every day to the fullest because one does not know when it is their last. I also agree with Cristobal and yourself on the idea that negativity should be eliminated and there should be a primary focus on relationships and being happy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that it is the fear of the uncertain that makes some so afraid of death. I also agree that Ishiguro uses the clones to show how knowledge of your own death eliminates all the fear surrounding it. To answer your question at the end, while knowing how and when you will die would likely encourage us to get the most out of life, not knowing makes us more ambitious as we try to create better futures for ourselves and others.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, I think I would rather know my fate than to wander about ignorant about what could possibly happen to me. I think your stance on the matter is quite interesting since you address quite a few questions that go unanswered in the book. I think mortality debate is something that difficult to tackle since people will always have opposing view. Still, could one be aware of their own mortality and not be miserable?
ReplyDeleteI think I would want to be aware of my own fate. It would give me more control over how I spend my time before dying. I think then individuals would live every day to the fullest, because they know they have a limited amount of time. I also agree with Cristobal and Antonio, on the aspect that we should focus on being happy and focus on the relationships we have.
ReplyDelete