Once again I find myself giving into the new age of blogging; whether my hand has been forced or not, I do feel young again. These kids with their new technology, what ever happened to Atari? I think Vonnegut would appreciate another round of Mario Kart on N64 if he were still able. As evident by Cat’s Cradle, Vonnegut was not the biggest fan of technology. Or was he? I sit here thinking to myself in a San Lorenzan accent whether Vonnegut’s novel is an attack on religion, science, both, or neither. I really had a hard time finding a direction for this post, partly because Miley Cyrus’ new song is on repeat on my iTunes, but mostly because this entire book is based on lies, and I don’t know where to separate truth from fallacy. Vonnegut demands that we decide for ourselves whether it is best to believe in lies or to try to believe in what we perceive as fact. As much as Bokonon preaches against granfaloons, Bokononism itself is the greatest one of them all.
A granfaloon by the Bokonon definition is a false karass, such as “Hoosiers,” or “The Communist Party.” A granfaloon is basically a group of people who think they are alike because an imaginary strand ties them together. Jonah puts down granfaloons throughout the entire book, when really he is apart one himself.
Bokononism is a religion based on harmless untruths. People who subscribe to Bokononism are linked together because of these untruths. Therefore they are linked together by nothing. Bokononism is a religion based on lies and hypocrisy. I think Vonnegut is trying to convey to us that as a society, we don’t know what to believe. We will believe anything. We will blindly follow some guy who tells us upfront that he is lying to us. We will blindly follow some guy who instructs us to drink the Kool-aid even though we all know it smells weird. We will blindly follow some guy who wants us to lie in bunks beds with brand new Nike’s on and proceed to kill ourselves. Vonnegut’s message transcends his era and applies to society even today. We as people don’t really know what we want.
The people of San Lorenzo submit to Bokonism because they are looking for something to believe in, whether it is true or not. Is this better than believing in nothing? It is hard to say. One would think the best solution would be to believe in something real, but who is to tell what is?
(Note: revisit difference b/w "apart" and "a part.")
ReplyDeleteSo, my question is: are "untruths" the same as "lies"? Is this merely a question of semantics, or might we glean something more, dare I say, profound in Vonnegut's choice of words? I think your closing paragraph is the strongest articulation of how we might approach the novel. It nicely highlights the problem with which we are confronted time and again throughout the text.
(Be careful that you don't get too sidetracked with superfluous or contradictory information. For example: if Vonnegut doesn't like technology, why would he like Atari or Nintendo? And, what does this have to do with the overall import of your post?)