In the midst of the both
clashing and complementary worlds of science and religion, Newt’s work of art
depicting a cat’s cradle provokes some thought regarding the human attraction
towards the irrational, despite the constant search for the rational.
As seen in the story,
Newt’s painting, like all works of art is subject to multiple, perhaps infinite
interpretations. “It means whatever it means” (168) says Newt. Castle sees it
as hell, which is perhaps a subtle comment on the troubling nature of the search to find meaning in things. Newt, on the other hand, associates it with the phrase “No damn cat, and no damn cradle”
(166). This section suggests a similarity between art and religion in that both
are subject to various opinions by people. People develop opinions on religion
and perhaps follow a religion or religions based on their set of morals,
beliefs, and hopes. Many appear to be brought to or from religion due to their
upbringings. Similarly, opinions regarding music or movies or paintings may be
developed, because of the way a person has been trained to view the world.
From this one can draw that
environment develops one’s tendencies towards certain views and habits. Sports
fans for instance arise, because of the environment in which they reside. I,
for instance, became a fan of the New York Rangers, because many of my friends
followed hockey. Today, my emotions are strongly influenced by how well the
team does. I wear Rangers T-shirts occasionally, much like I may wear a cross
as a Catholic. Every time I watch a game or go to mass I don’t rationalize the
reasons for doing so. I blindly follow the rules that I've created in my world.
Why I follow these rules can be traced to my upbringing. I wash my hands, like
I follow the Rangers, because these rules have been established and until I
have reason to stop following them, I will continue to do so. In my world, they
are truths.
It seems then that everyone
rationalizes the world around them in some way and yet acts irrationally so
often (at least it seems so from the perspective of others). The rules that we
establish for ourselves, whether what the color red is to us or what religion
we follow, dictate how we respond emotionally to the events around us. If
someone were to tell me that my blue is their red, I would disagree, knowing
well that my kindergarten teacher and Crayola taught me otherwise. So the
actions that seem rational in someone’s world may seem irrational in another.
It seems that from this arises the search to distinguish truths and lies.
I apologize if this makes very little sense – I was just following a train of thought.
I really like how you brought to light the idea that every person rationalizes his or her own behavior, even if those around them disagree. Jonah finds Bokononism irrational at the beginning of Cat's Cradle because he himself is a Christian. However, at the end of the novel, Jonah tells Mona that he doesn't believe in anything. Because he almost loses her as a result of this, he rationalizes his decision to accept Bokononism. This seemed incredible irrational to me, especially considering Jonah fell madly in love with Mona before he even met her. However, he rationalizes his love for Mona to himself, and rationalizes his decision to become a Bokononist in order to keep her as his own.
ReplyDeleteIn life, if people were to accept the mantra "to each his own", especially in religion, I believe the world would be a much more peaceful place. People believe their religion is the "correct" one and are able to rationalize it to themselves. However, people in other religions may find this irrational, as they believe their own religion is indeed the "better" one. If people didn't believe there was one correct framework for life, they would be more open to others. And if they were able to understand that each person has his own truth, then the world would be much more accepting.