The introduction to Cat’s Cradle says, “ nothing in this
book is true.” So I asked myself, does this mean that it’s all lies? As I read
on, ‘Jonah’ tells the readers, “all of these true things I am about to tell you
are shameless lies.” (pg.5) But how can true things be lies? What if a truth is
not the opposite of a lie? Perception and
perspective make all of this possible.
As I began reading the book, I expected everything to be
untrue. I questioned whether the members of his ‘karass’ were ‘real’, whether
Dr. Hoenikker even existed, and frankly, whether his name was even Jonah. After
discussing what ‘real’ meant in class, I reconsidered how I linked the terms
‘real’ and ‘true’.
Just like in ‘The
Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge’, the story in Cat’s Cradle does not exist off
of the page; we accept this because we are told that nothing in the book is
‘true’. However, in Cat’s Cradle, we are taken into different levels of truth
and lies due to multiple characters perspectives and perceptions. As we move
passed (and almost forget) about the untruthful nature of the Cat’s Cradle
story, we move into the story that Jonah is trying to tell. A story within a
story – sort of like Inception! With multiple secondary sources, I found myself
getting lost and confused trying to figure out what was ‘true’ and what was
‘untrue’ regarding Dr. Hoenikker’s story. Each new source of information would
contaminate the previous account. This is prevalent every time someone talks
about Frank. Marvin Breed adored Frank while Newt portrayed him as a misfit.
Similarly with Dr.Hoenikker; Marvin Breed says that he is “a queer son of a
bitch,’ (pg.64) while Knowles says, ‘(..) he aint dead.’ (pg.60) This comes
down to perspective and opinion- neither of them is telling the ‘truth’ nor
telling a ‘lie’.
Finally, we are introduced to two opposing views regarding
‘truth’. Dr. Breed says, ‘The more truth we have to work with, the richer we
become.” (pg.41) Meanwhile, Miss Faust says, “ I have trouble understanding how
truth, all by itself, could be enough for a person.” (pg54)First of all, we
must question whether these statements are a ‘true’ reflection of the
individuals’ beliefs. Then, from these two statements, we are given more
evidence that people view the concept of ‘truth’ differently. Within the
recollection of events, in order to sound more interesting, there is a great
possibility that these character fabricated events. Are these stories the shameless
lies? How much of these stories does Jonah believe? How much should the readers
believe?
In this novel that is said to be untrue, is there such thing
as a lie? Or is it all just a story?
I really liked your question about the veracity of Jonah's perceived Karass because it reminded me of the woman from Indiana who believed that she was connected to everyone who shared her background. Although Jonah says that she believes in a false Karass, I wonder what makes us convinced that those who Jonah perceives to be a members of his Karass are legitimate. Furthermore, with the knowledge that Bokononism is based on the idea that man cannot know the truth about his life I wonder about Jonah's attempts to identify his own Karass. In this way, I think Vonnegut suggests something else about our relationships with others- that we cannot truly understand what makes individuals into an interconnected group and that all attempts to do so are faulty. Despite his belief in Bokononism, Jonah's identification of his Karass is not necessarily any more legitimate than that of the Hoosier woman he meets on the plane, but he still believes himself better to understand his place in the world.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the doubt you raised regarding the link between a “truth” and a “lie,” but I want to add to that. As we mentioned in class, this book is categorized as fiction, so how can anything be true? After reading the statement “nothing in this book is true” and the first few chapters, my instinct was to look Vonnegut up (I have never heard of him or read his works before) to see if there’s a “lie” in Cat’s Cradle that is based on a “truth” from Vonnegut’s life. I found a few things from Vonnegut’s life that correlate to the book and I want to mention one; after World War II Vonnegut worked for General Electric where he interviewed scientists about their research. Following the interviews, he realized they were indifferent to how their discoveries might be used and this surprised him*. This correlates to Vonnegut’s attempt to cynically educate us about science in Cat’s Cradle; the section in Newton Hoenikker’s letter (p. 17) where, in response to the first test of the bomb and a colleague’s guilt statement, his father asks “what is sin?”
ReplyDelete*“Cat’s Cradle”, Wikipedia, recent update on 09.06.2010