Cats Cradle and Postmodernism

Cat's Cradle is a highly Postmodern text. The main theme of the novel is the parody of the concepts of truth and progress. Vonnegut uses Cat's Cradle to satire the ideas society holds about progress and how it is acheived through the pursuit of truth; the pursuit of science. Society seems to believe that it can better itself through obtaining empirical scientific data about the world around us. This is a belief of Modernism. This belief is that the more man knows about the nature of how things work or the more knowledge society obtains, the better off it is. But this is a belief highly critisized by the principles of Postmodernism as well as by Vonnegut. A renowned example of postmodernism's questioning of this modern forgery is the creation of the atom bomb (which appears in the novel). Supposedly the progression of society into the realms of science, discovery, and knowlegde, leads the world to the ever-nearing goal of a utopia. However the only benefit one of societys greatest scientific discoveries, in this case the atomic bomb, was the capacity and ramifications of endings hundreds of thousands of lives. So does this pursuit of science, of knowledge, of truth, really lead society to the bettering of mankind?

Vonnegut uses the plot of Cat's Cradle to make a postmodern parody of how science really does not lead to a utopia. In chapter 66 of the novel, Papa (the leader in San Lorenzo) suffers from a mysterious ailment and right before passing out he says "'You,' he said to Frank hoarsely, 'you - Franklin Hoenikker - you will be the next President of San Lorenzo. Science - you have science. Science is the strongest thing there is.' 'Science' said 'Papa' 'Ice.'" He elects to make Frank Hoenikker the new president of San Lorenzo because he thinks he is about to die. He chooses Frank because he knows of his possession of Ice-Nine (which happens to be the greatest and newest scientific discovery of mankind in the novel). The satire is this: Papa assumes Frank would be the best option for President because he has science; Ice-Nine. Papas ideas about how science betters society reflect the Modern idea of the concept. However, later in the novel, the reader discovers that Ice-Nine brings about the end of the world. Vonnegut's satire reflects the Postmodern concept that pursuing a utopia through science is a facetious pursuit because the further mankind dives into scientific discovery, the more destructive society becomes.

Brave New World - essay preparation

I think i know how to handle this essay much better than the last one on The Tempest. The practice has helped me and i feel readily prepared. I have been thinking about what i'd like to say about the novel and out of all the complex ideas within, i think i'm going to merely contrast the novel to our own society; and going to compare the similarities in the novel with our society today. There are so many ways that Huxley's fictitious society could be a prophesy for the future, as well as, a profound fantasy. I would like to call these concepts into question and see what theories i may be able to produce. I have also decided on the texts i'm going to synthesize with my analysis: Huxley's Brave New World Revisited, Neil Postman's Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, and Sir Ken Robinson's Youtube.com RSA animate. 


Brave New World Revisited is a good text to use i feel because Huxley certainly knows his novel better than any other scholar. He provides valuable insights into it and how the society in his novel operates. I'm going to use this to dramatize the possibilities for own own society. 


Neil Postman's  Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology has vastly interesting theories about industry and technology. I plan to use this text as a bridge in my analysis between Huxley's novel and what i want to say about its connections and possible predictions to the real world. I can use his arguments to parallel my own and act as a backdrop for my opinions.


Finally and lastly, i will use Sir Ken Robinson's Youtube.com RSA animate. As can be seen in my previous blog post, there are a number of ways Robinson's opinions on American education relate to concepts in Brave New World. I'm going to use my previous arguments on this and synthesize new ones as well to reinforce my thesis for my essay.

RSA animate/ Brave New World

There are lots of parallels i noticed in the video that were similar to Brave New World. Several of which were very strong congruencies:

First, there was the idea of ADHD being an epidemic in America. Sir Ken Robinson points out that there is not really an epidemic and that children are being medicated carelessly. they are given Ritalin and Adderol so they can be focused in school. a non-medical problem is being cared for with medication. this strongly resembles the Somma in Brave New World. if someone isnt happy, they simple take Somma, and suddenly theyre content again. This reliance on drugs is a parallel between Huxleys novel and Sir Robinson's video.

Next, i noticed the similarities between how our education system puts children in groups by age and has them taught to think that there is only one answer. Robinson points out how students are taught linearly instead of divergently. this standardization of education reflects the caste system in Brave New World and how each caste is conditioned to be only able to do the job their caste demands. each caste is conditioned through hypnopaedia to to only think one way, this resembles the culture of our education system and how  students are taught to think only in terms of if one score high on tests, one is intelligent and will have a good job and if one scores low, the person is unintelligent and must have a laborous job.

Another significant thing i noticed was the similarities between the "production line mentality" of America's education system, and the biologically mass-produced citizens of the World State in Brave New World. The students in America go through this process of classes organized by age, yet as Robinson elucidates, age does not necessarily dictate a students aptitude or discipline with a certain subject. This parallels the caste system in the novel and how everyone is conditioned from pre-birth to maturity to only be intelligent enough for their caste's jobs.

Brave New World- Chapter 3: an examination of collectivism and inverse morality

"Wheels must turn steadily, but can not turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as sturdy as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment."
this quote encompassed the industrial and economic systems in Brave New World. The lower castes of this society are simple workers; multitudes of drones and one-task thinkers. the mass production of human life is key to the economic structure of this society. but there is another factor that goes along with the workers. not only are the workers created for the purpose of a simple life of servitude, they are also conditioned to enjoy such a meager life. they are content with this lifestyle in every sense, and therefore, they are stable. like biological machinery. constantly working working working and satisfied with every minute of their day.


family, monogamy, impulse, feeling, desire? 
these are concepts that are no longer established in the Brave New World. family is an extinct concept replaced with the communistic principle that "everyone belongs to everyone else." humans are grown not birthed and the exclusive nature of family has been expanded to a society of free love. the morals of this society are not that one person belongs with one partner (as it is today) but instead the morality of the culture lies in multiple partners. the idea is that if a person only has one emotional outlet that they become unstable. by introducing multiple partners a person has multiple outlets and therefore is more stable. in the novel the character Mustapha Mons makes an analogy of a person being like a pipe. if one hole is punctured then it would spray out a jet stream of water. however with many holes, the pipe would merely leak from them all. Thus, stability is reached.


impulse and desire is extinguished from the culture. these are dangerous, unstable emotions which threaten the structure of the society. by conditioning the ideology of collective love and property into the minds of the people, they lose the opportunity for emotions such as jealousy or envy or desire which can inspire or be inspired by impulse and desire.


"'stability,' said the Controller, 'stability. No civilization without social stability. No social stability without individual stability.'"
As can be seen in the quote the goal of the society is to create a world where the peoples are emotionally stable and ultimately happy with their lives. by doing this a utopia-esque social structure can be created where the industrial and economic aspects of the society reach a state of near-perfection. which incidentally can be related to the previous quote, and the efficiency of "sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment."

The Tempest essay preparation

In discussions of postcolonialism, one controversial issue in the Tempest has been whether the dominated culture -in this case the character Caliban- is wronged or the domineering Prospero maintains justification. On the one hand, George Will argues this is an unjustified political response. On the other hand, Stephen Greenblatt contends (with evidence) that Shakespeare deliberately wanted to explore this concept. He connects Shakespeare's research and interest in imperialism with his purpose in The Tempest. Others even maintain that it was his main purpose in writing The Tempest. However, my own view is congruent with Greenblatt's. I feel Shakespeare's main interest in writing this poetry was to call question to the concept and he pulled his interest from the colonization of the native americas.

In my essay i plan to discuss the concept of postcolonialism and then pull into view the contrasting views on Shakespeare's intent with the concept in The Tempest. First i will use Bressler's discussion of it. Then I'm going to use the literary debate we covered in class between Greenblatt and Will as well as the ideas in A Tempest and how aime cesaire further developed ideology in The Tempest. After discussing the the ideas between these sources and contrasting them as well as comparing them, i will synthesize my own opinion into the essay. 

Im going to attempt to use a large context for my discussion and possibly some outside research beyond what we have done is class. Yet for now, my outline consists of mainly the literary debate and how the views expressed in it as well as my own mesh together. All of this discussion will be preceded with postcolonialism arguments. Then in the end, i will connect these discussions together and use the concepts expressed to sum up a final point i want to make about Shakespeare and his writing pursuits on postcolonialism and how the authors in my essay relate and differ. 

Will/Greenblatt literary debate

George Will believes there is too much political interpretation. He argues that by over criticizing literature, it devalues the piece and it devalues the authors as well. He maintains that there is all sorts of political responses which can be derived from a literary work, however all these criticisms are overdone and sometimes done with the intention of making political statements. And such statements may not be congruent with the work. In his essay he states "This ideology radically devalues authors and elevates the ideologists -the critics- as indispensable decoders of literature, all of which is, by definition, irreducibly political."

Stephen Greenblatt argues that Will's essay is unfounded. He states that there is some interpretations that are obviously meant for seeing. The colonialism and its political ties in The Tempest were very deliberately put forth by Shakespeare. He argues that Shakespeare is an art and being so, it is supposed to be widely criticized. He argues all of Will's points and nearly plays the devils advocate towards his statements. He says in his essay "A love of literature may help to forge community, but it is a community founded on imaginative freedom, he play of language, and scholarly honesty, not on flag waving, boosterism, and conformity."

I identify much more with what Greenblatt has to say. I think when authors write a work, especially a poetic one, they are hoping for their work to be analyzed and criticized. The most famous works are the ones with controversy. Although i do see Will;s point in the sense that political responses can most certainly be overdone. Yet i side much more with Greenblatt and his idea that "poets cannot soar when their feet are stuck in social cement."

Skakespeare and Colonialiasm

In Acts 2 and 3 of The Tempest, Shakespeare uses the interactions between Prospero and Caliban to represent struggles between colonization and native peoples. Caliban believes the island was his right of inheritance and that Prospero took it from him. He feels he has been extorted by Prospero and his magical powers. The way Caliban views the situation is that he is being forced to work as a slave on an island which he should be ruling. And he hates him for this as can be seen in lines 1-3: "all the infections that the sun pucks up from bogs, fens, flats, on Prosper fall and make him by inchmeal a disease!" However Prospero sees things differently. In his view,  he brought intelligence to Caliban and the island. By coming to this island and bringing it culture, he has gained the right to its ownership. And by raising Caliban, he feels Caliban should serve him. Because without Prospero's help he would not know how to take care of himself or even speak.

This ties into the "cultural studies" we got in class. Specifically how it describes how there is not always one objective reality, but instead there is many. Many different people can see something different ways. How a situation is interpreted is completely dependent on point of view. "From this point of view, no single or primary objective really exists; instead many realities exist." Each person has their own reality. There are many examples of different cultures being colonized and no doubt in each example the culture being dominated has a different view of what happened than the dominating culture. Such as Native Americans being forced to walk the Trail of Tears or when Britain colonized India. In the packet on culture studies it states how there can be an assertion between "a different perspective, a vantage point not in the dominant culture but one from which to view the world and its peoples: they speak for not one culture, but many; not one cultural perspective, but a host; not one interpretation of life, but many."

I think in The Tempest Shakespeare does not necessarily attempt to condemn nor condone colonization. I think he wants to, in a way, do both. He uses Caliban to represent cultures that have been colonized and uses Prospero to represent cultures that have done colonizing. But i have not seen him take favor to either side, at least not this far in the novel.

The Tempest Act I - Prospero's rhetoric

In Act One of The Tempest it can be seen how Prospero uses rhetoric when he tells Miranda about her childhood. Several times he appeals to her emotions to make himself seem just and even victimized. When he describes the neglect of his responsibilities as Duke of Milan he tries to justify why he did it by saying it was for knowledgeable pursuits. He tells Miranda "I, thus neglecting worldly ends, all dedicated to closeness and the bettering of my mind..." to convince her he had good intentions. Then, Prospero describes how he trusted his brother, Antonio, to help him take care of the kingdom, but that his trust was taken for granted. "And my trust, like a good parent, did beget of him a falsehood in its contrary as great as my trust was, which had indeed no limit, a confidence sans bound." He claims he trusted Antonio so infinetly and so deeply that his brother used it against him. He tells Miranda that Antonio knew he would trust him no matter what and therefore his brother used that to overthrow him with treacherous deeds of political bribery. This makes him seem like his only mistake was being a trusting brother and that he was severely wronged. Later, Miranda asks if she was a burden on their long trip through the sea to the shore they currently live at and he replies, "Oh, a cherubim thou wast that did preserve me. Thou didst smile infused with a fortitude from heaven, when I have decked the sea with drops full salt, under my burthen groaned; which raised in me an undergoing stomach to bear up against what should ensue." Once again, Prospero is using Miranda's emotion reactions to influence how she sees him through his story; a rhetorical device knows as "ethos." He tells her she was the one thing that got him through his suffering. He claims her smile is what encouraged him to continue onward and that it gave him the strength to get through the temperance. Prospero's use of rhetoric is very apparent in Act One and he uses it to manipulate the other characters.

socratic reflections - textbook issue

history; how can it be taught objectively? it seems that the actions of a historical figure or an event that has taken place can always be seen in different ways. how this information is taught can greatly influence the scholars opinion or interpretation of what happened. for example, any war in history could be seen to have a right side or a wrong side. take the U.S. Civil War for example, both the South and the North had ideals they fought for which they each believed to be "right."

so with the ability to portray the same events as heroic or malicious, who can say which the events really were? well the only logical answer is to provide the facts as objectively and unbiased as possible. but to do this takes extremely tactful word choice and, of course, the inclusion of all peoples involved. the concept of manipulating history's connotation must be acknowledged and furthermore used to caution those reading the textbook.

thus the simple breakdown for an objective display of history has a recipe. for the events which transpired everyone who was effected must be noted. and instead of saying how these events or actions were right or wrong, the feelings of those effected must be shown. objective history lies not with describing the ethics of an event, but instead describing how those who experienced the event reacted to and felt about it.