data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/63135/631356ab895e8638859fb9eb8e84b8c214a10a29" alt=""
Vonnegut's portrayal of the intersections of religion, nationalism, and capitalism were both brilliant and hilarious. I don't think Cat's Cradle is so much an existential statement (though existentialism certainly grew out of post-nuclear cynicism) as a critique of power and language: religions (through the metaphor of the made-up Bokonism) are founded upon lies, figures that are supposed to command authority and respect lack empathy, conversations between characters present false images. Science, in the form of a made-up compound that can end the world, is presented as undeniable truth and reality, but only when and because it is stripped of human notions like faith, hope, and love. Everything is an illusion. There are no answers to the questions that conflicting messages raise.
Then again, I'm seeing everything as a critique of power, icons, and semantics these days.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8b526/8b5265e8c770674255cc2a2cb1a077e269e0c534" alt=""
2 comments:
I loved Vonnegut in high school. I think his themes and stories are becoming relevant again. That's a good thing for his books, but a lousy thing for the world.
I think your interpretation sounds spot on.
So Borders was having the "Buy 3-for-the-price-of-2" sale, and for some odd reason they had a lot of Vonnegut books on the sale rack. Next up on my list (but who knows when I'll get to it) is Slaughterhouse Five, which I read sophomore year in high school but seriously don't remember.
Post a Comment