I’m very confused by Vonnegut’s logic in Cat’s Cradle. He characterizes science as a form of discovering truth, while he characterizes religion as a form of lies. Before the book even starts, he gives this negative depiction of religion (“Nothing in this book is true” followed by a religious quote). But then he severely criticizes science and its aim to seek out truth. Confusing right? I can’t speak for Vonnegut, but I think he did this because he believed that lies are good or beneficial. For example, Bokononism is based on “bittersweet lies” (2). These lies give people purpose in life and make them feel important. Sometimes, it’s good to be oblivious to the truth.
Additionally, in the Supernatural episode “The Monster at the End of This Book,” Sam and Dean are completely blindsided when they find out there is a prophet writing out their entire lives through a series of novels. I think things might have been less complicated for them if they hadn’t known this prophet existed. They mapped out their entire day just so they could avoid the prophecies. Thus, in a way lies are good and maybe that’s one of the possible themes Vonnegut was trying to convey. But, I could be completely wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment