Kurt Vonnegut’s book Cat’s Cradle made me reminisce of the time when I became disgusted with religion and when I gave up on science. My grandmother a devout catholic that never attended a church as far as I knew killed whatever respect I had for religion. My chemistry teacher a pissant in my view killed science by not even bothering to teaching me anything.
I used to maintain the belief that ignorance was a sin, venom to humanity. In Cat’s Cradle lies have the ability to make life a lot easier than the truth of reality. I have had a longer time to reflect on the book and its message at this point. I couldn't help but remember what someone once told me. During World War II in the death camps, those who had a higher chance of living were those devoted to their faiths. It is clear that Bokonon made lies to give the people some need of survival. People like me who couldn't accept the lies of religion have a tougher time searching for a reason to survive. Perhaps that was my grandmother, a person who believed the lies and although she was always sick she manage to live for a long time.
Reflecting further on it is it the pissants that are destine to die because we cannot find lies that we could hold on too? I can’t help to think that science was just painted negatively, and wasn’t given a different perspective like religion was. It seemed to me that science was just the source of all problems and maybe it is. Ice-nine for example created out of curiosity but could destroy the world. Then again isn’t that the best solution to our problems? Complete obliteration.
I cannot lie at this point. I am having trouble writing this just because the book contradicted everything I believe in. I have too much to say but no words to say it with, I need to cut off here…
An intriguing post, particularly with the way you began to play w/ Vonnegut's own rhetoric. But I am further intrigued by your closing statement, given that it seems in itself to have contradicted what you wrote before it in the post. It seemed to me that Vonnegut's novel acted as a kind of exhibit for your negative feelings toward religion and science, but in your closing statement you say that the novel "contradicted everything I believe in." What, then, is your reader left with? Is science and religion more valuable than you initially let on? Or should it be? Or does Vonnegut at once reveal and conceal such value?
ReplyDeleteI believe Vonnegut shows a clear penchant toward the negative aspects of science since he is, after all, focusing mainly on the very controversial atomic bomb. As far as religion, I believe that Vonnegut proves how a religion founded on lies can be just as effective as any in helping us to cope with the harshness of reality. The San Lorenzans have no true happiness in their lifestyle and thus Bokononism provides a sort of escape for them. So in that regard, Bokononism is wonderfully successful.
ReplyDelete