Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Religion, Smiligion.
Is it just me, or did anyone else feel as if Vonnegut entirely destroyed any credibility religion had? Throughout the book He emphasizes that the main purpose of religon is to make the people who believe "feel" that their lives have meaning and purpose. "Truth" plays no real part in religion, but it is the illusion of truth and meaning that religion actually provides. There is parallelism throughout the book between the books of Bokonon and the books of the bible. The books of Bokonon are based on lies, and dare I say that Vonnegut was trying to insinuate that the books of the bible were based on lies as well. I personally believe that the bible was never meant to be taken seriously. God didnt really create all of this in 6 days and if you were to look up the meaning of the names Adam and Eve you would find out that Adam-- is hebrew for "man" and Eva-- is hebrew for "mother of the race." It was human's dire need for substance and the search for "truth" that made them take the bible into literal terms.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I believe that this was exactly what Vonnegut was trying to do. However, I don't think he was trying to destroy religions credibility, but instead show that even a religion based on lies can be meaningful and serve a purpose.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the first part of this post but the second part, which is your personal opinion on Christianity, I disagree with. I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion and mine is the complete opposite of what you wrote. I believe that the Bible is credible. But, I do agree with the idea that Vonnegut is comparing the books of Bokonon to the books of the Bible and in my eyes, he gets nowhere with it. Bokononism has no point, it has no ending! Christianity does, you have faith and a relationship with God and you go to heaven when you die, period.
ReplyDeleteOkay, I may have been harsh and my words were confused. I'm not saying the bible isnt credible (I'm actually a christian!) but I was saying that I think the writers of the bible didnt mean for it to be taken literally but metaphorically.
ReplyDeleteI too believe that Vonnegut somehow provided his own opinion towards religion though Cat's Cradle. The books of Bokonon along with the people of San Lorenzo was somewhat a foil for the bible and some of it's followers. (This isn't necessarily my belief, I'm trying to interpret the belief of Vonnegut through evidence I found.) He portrays the people of San Lorenzo as very poor and pitiful followers of a religion that is made up of lies while they are completely aware of it, but they still continue to be followers because of the feeling of structure and comfort it provides. This can be interpreted as a symbol for those who "blindly" follow a religion. Some perhaps choose to stay ignorant or oblivious to what can be proven as a "lie" in their religion just because they want to continue a life with a false appearance of structure. This was a good thought to expand on "Esha Boo"!
ReplyDelete