Read for the second time in February 2013.
I read "Breakfast of Champions" for the first time about 12 years ago in the midst of a Vonnegut reading frenzy. Elements stuck out for me over the years. In this one, Vonnegut relays one of my favorite aborted stories of his about two yeast cells, consuming sugar and shitting out alcohol, slowly killing themselves in the process. The talk to each other about why they are doing this, neither one with the imagination to realize that they are making champagne. I also remembered the main plot about a mentally ill man coming to believe he was the only person with free will in the universe thanks to a book by Kilgore Trout.
A lot of it, I did not remember at all though. It did not completely hold up for me as among one of Vonnegut's best works. he flaws are more apparent to me now, than they were those many years ago, speed-reading through Vonnegut without digesting. I think things I think are flaws now, I might've thought were strengths back then. Back then I was in awe of Vonnegut's crazy imagination. Now, I think maybe he was a frustrated short story writer, shoehorning aborted ideas into novels where they might not have really fit.
Of course, Vonnegut is still funny. He's still entertaining. His ideas should be read more broadly. I still firmly believe that America would be a better place if more people read and took Vonnegut seriously. In "Breakfast of Champions," which I read in order to take a break from Nietzsche's "Thus Spoke Zararthustra" (which is great but slow going for me), Vonnegut wrestles in his accessible way with materialism (In the Hegelian philosophical sense) and his cheery nihilism finds itself at battle with his humanism.
To Vonnegut, the line between inanimate machines and animate ones is a very thin one. Vonnegut, here, wrestles with the implications that human actions are involuntary responses to chemical reactions. That human beings behave very much like machines. There is also quite a bit of presenting the absurdity of the world we live in by conveying the world we live in as if it were a strange world in a science fiction novel. That is, he is writing in a style of fantastic science fiction, but about the mundane world we live in and recognize, not a fantastic one. At its best it satirizes human folly. At its worst, it's a little bit too cute, and almost as bad as some of the whimsical bullshit that would follow in Vonnegut's wake.
Vonnegut also tries to strike some personal notes in this. I'm not sure the story isn't better without them. I'm not sure the story isn't better without Vonnegut in it either. And certainly, I don't think this book ends on a strong note. Nonetheless, Vonnegut is almost always entertaining and he's almost always interesting as well. "Breakfast of Champions" is no exception, despite some apparent flaws, it is still a work worthy of great admiration.
Showing posts with label Kurt Vonnegut. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kurt Vonnegut. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
God Bless You Mr. Rosewater - Kurt Vonnegut
Read for the first time in January 2013.
"God Bless You Mr. Rosewater" is one of Vonnegut's weaker efforts. It is still much better than his least works "Timequake" and "Player Piano." The common thread here is a smug self-righteousness that undermines his schtick. Speaking of schtick, it is one of those occasions when you are conscious of an author doing his schtick which is something you usually enjoy, but in this instance actually grates for some reason. My biggest complaint though is the tone of condescension Vonnegut takes toward "the masses." It's also my biggest problem with "Timequake" and "Player Piano."
It's not quite that I find his embrace of socialism and charity either wrong or insincere, but it seems done with a phony admiration that is tired and hackneyed. In today's world you can see right-wingers use the same kind of romance to sell tax-cuts for the very rich and demonize a guy like Vonnegut as not a real American, which was probably true enough in Vonnegut's time too. And this itself is no fault of Vonnegut's. What I object to is the cheapness of the tactic.
The fact that I came to use the word tactic, I think speaks volumes about this work. I don't think I would that word while discussing Vonnegut at his best. A tactic is used by someone with an argument to make. And though I would never say Vonnegut is not making an argument in his works - He is a deeply moral author with something to say about how we should live - I would say that the body of his arguments are not so nakedly evident in his best work.
No Vonnegut's pedanticism is hidden in his best works behind his wild creativity, entertaining characters, and brilliantly funny humor. This work does have its share of entertaining characters and at times the humor is as legitimately funny as anything in literature. But again, there are moments when the Vonnegut schtick grates. And again, it often feels as though Vonnegut is a little too smug about the whole thing. And there's that creepy feeling you get where someone seems to be showing their respect for the "working man," but you get the sense, not exactly that Vonnegut doesn't respect them, but that the respect is misapplied and that there is a fundamental disrespect congruent with the sincere respect. Like he respects the working man, but also knows that he could never be one, and lurking in his mind is the belief that this is so because he is in small but important ways better.
That's the charge at its most naked with minimal dancing around. I hate to put it that baldly, but I try to put plainly what I find off-putting in the tone of Vonnegut's writing at times like these and it is the best I can do. Nonetheless, this is one of those Vonnegut books that should be read like some people read the Bible. The world would be a better place if more people read this book. It's just not among his best.
"God Bless You Mr. Rosewater" is one of Vonnegut's weaker efforts. It is still much better than his least works "Timequake" and "Player Piano." The common thread here is a smug self-righteousness that undermines his schtick. Speaking of schtick, it is one of those occasions when you are conscious of an author doing his schtick which is something you usually enjoy, but in this instance actually grates for some reason. My biggest complaint though is the tone of condescension Vonnegut takes toward "the masses." It's also my biggest problem with "Timequake" and "Player Piano."
It's not quite that I find his embrace of socialism and charity either wrong or insincere, but it seems done with a phony admiration that is tired and hackneyed. In today's world you can see right-wingers use the same kind of romance to sell tax-cuts for the very rich and demonize a guy like Vonnegut as not a real American, which was probably true enough in Vonnegut's time too. And this itself is no fault of Vonnegut's. What I object to is the cheapness of the tactic.
The fact that I came to use the word tactic, I think speaks volumes about this work. I don't think I would that word while discussing Vonnegut at his best. A tactic is used by someone with an argument to make. And though I would never say Vonnegut is not making an argument in his works - He is a deeply moral author with something to say about how we should live - I would say that the body of his arguments are not so nakedly evident in his best work.
No Vonnegut's pedanticism is hidden in his best works behind his wild creativity, entertaining characters, and brilliantly funny humor. This work does have its share of entertaining characters and at times the humor is as legitimately funny as anything in literature. But again, there are moments when the Vonnegut schtick grates. And again, it often feels as though Vonnegut is a little too smug about the whole thing. And there's that creepy feeling you get where someone seems to be showing their respect for the "working man," but you get the sense, not exactly that Vonnegut doesn't respect them, but that the respect is misapplied and that there is a fundamental disrespect congruent with the sincere respect. Like he respects the working man, but also knows that he could never be one, and lurking in his mind is the belief that this is so because he is in small but important ways better.
That's the charge at its most naked with minimal dancing around. I hate to put it that baldly, but I try to put plainly what I find off-putting in the tone of Vonnegut's writing at times like these and it is the best I can do. Nonetheless, this is one of those Vonnegut books that should be read like some people read the Bible. The world would be a better place if more people read this book. It's just not among his best.
Monday, September 17, 2012
The Sirens of Titan - Kurt Vonnegut
Read for the second time in September 2012.
Upon finishing Palm Sunday, I decided to embark on a reread of Vonnegut’s works. I chose Sirens of Titan, because although I didn’t remember it as the best, I found the idea behind the story the most compelling. That idea being that the whole purpose of the human race was to deliver a replacement part for a spaceship to a stranded messenger from another galaxy, stuck on one of Saturn’s moons. I recall fondly the playful way Vonnegut told this tale with a nihilistic whimsy and I remain impressed by it.
Vonnegut also invents a new religion here. I think this is something he was fond of doing early in his career. The gist of this religion is that god is indifferent to human beings. You take care of each other and I’ll take care of myself is the message of this religion’s god. As presented by Vonnegut, it seems like an inarguably great religion, an improvement for humanity if we had the ability to embrace it. But I lack Vonnegut’s talents, and it sounds depressing in my own words.
Another thing about this religion is that people handicap their advantages, and this leads to people forgoing the desire to take advantage of others. I’m not 100% enthused by the invented religion in execution, but I’d prefer if it, and not scientology, had succeeded into having real world converts.
There seems to be a strange breach of logic when one character tells another character to pay attention to his future son’s good luck object, and then that same character sees to it that that character’s memory is erased. That conversation must be their for the reader’s benefit. Tsk Tsk.
I remain convinced that the world would be a better place if everyone read and studied Vonnegut. But I also realize that human nature being what it is, people would still be shitty to each other. It’s not as easy as making up a new religion. It’s not religion’s fault that people are shitty to each other; religion is merely an excuse or a pretext. Everything has a material explanation.
That’s what religion blamers don’t really understand. Religion isn’t even really a comfort for people, but a coping mechanism, and probably one is as good as another. The human mind needs something with which it can negotiate for control over all of those things it can’t control. I don’t think Vonnegut understood this at this point in his career or that he ever would. But that’s okay. It’s not really a flaw.
But Vonnegut’s great strength is in recognizing the perspectives that makes human beings do tiny small-minded things that increase the unhappiness in the world. He tries to shift our perspective, so that we might recognize them ourselves and behave in a way that increases the happiness in this world. I think with this book about man’s search for meaning and usefulness, Vonnegut is at his very best in this regard. It’s probably Vonnegut’s most ambitious book in terms of big ideas and probably his most underrated. It belongs on the same tier as Slaughterhouse-Five and Cat’s Cradle.
Ultimately,I think nobody has written more useful parables for the human race since Jesus Christ himself. And let’s face it, a whole lot of Jesus’s parables aren’t really that useful once you realize that the kingdom of god isn’t a real thing.
Upon finishing Palm Sunday, I decided to embark on a reread of Vonnegut’s works. I chose Sirens of Titan, because although I didn’t remember it as the best, I found the idea behind the story the most compelling. That idea being that the whole purpose of the human race was to deliver a replacement part for a spaceship to a stranded messenger from another galaxy, stuck on one of Saturn’s moons. I recall fondly the playful way Vonnegut told this tale with a nihilistic whimsy and I remain impressed by it.
Vonnegut also invents a new religion here. I think this is something he was fond of doing early in his career. The gist of this religion is that god is indifferent to human beings. You take care of each other and I’ll take care of myself is the message of this religion’s god. As presented by Vonnegut, it seems like an inarguably great religion, an improvement for humanity if we had the ability to embrace it. But I lack Vonnegut’s talents, and it sounds depressing in my own words.
Another thing about this religion is that people handicap their advantages, and this leads to people forgoing the desire to take advantage of others. I’m not 100% enthused by the invented religion in execution, but I’d prefer if it, and not scientology, had succeeded into having real world converts.
There seems to be a strange breach of logic when one character tells another character to pay attention to his future son’s good luck object, and then that same character sees to it that that character’s memory is erased. That conversation must be their for the reader’s benefit. Tsk Tsk.
I remain convinced that the world would be a better place if everyone read and studied Vonnegut. But I also realize that human nature being what it is, people would still be shitty to each other. It’s not as easy as making up a new religion. It’s not religion’s fault that people are shitty to each other; religion is merely an excuse or a pretext. Everything has a material explanation.
That’s what religion blamers don’t really understand. Religion isn’t even really a comfort for people, but a coping mechanism, and probably one is as good as another. The human mind needs something with which it can negotiate for control over all of those things it can’t control. I don’t think Vonnegut understood this at this point in his career or that he ever would. But that’s okay. It’s not really a flaw.
But Vonnegut’s great strength is in recognizing the perspectives that makes human beings do tiny small-minded things that increase the unhappiness in the world. He tries to shift our perspective, so that we might recognize them ourselves and behave in a way that increases the happiness in this world. I think with this book about man’s search for meaning and usefulness, Vonnegut is at his very best in this regard. It’s probably Vonnegut’s most ambitious book in terms of big ideas and probably his most underrated. It belongs on the same tier as Slaughterhouse-Five and Cat’s Cradle.
Ultimately,I think nobody has written more useful parables for the human race since Jesus Christ himself. And let’s face it, a whole lot of Jesus’s parables aren’t really that useful once you realize that the kingdom of god isn’t a real thing.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Palm Sunday - Kurt Vonnegut
Read for the first time in August 2012.
This is a collection of Vonnegut’s essays, speeches, short stories and other artifacts with some original writing tying everything together. It’s not a whole lot dissimilar to his later novels but without an overarching plot. It mostly covers the period 1974 - 1979 or so. It is very good.
It’s not even terribly dated. Not even the cold war stuff. It doesn’t feel like an artifact at all. It also reminds me of the importance of Vonnegut. He is not my favorite author really, though I do think he is really great. I read most of his novels about ten years ago and loved all of them except for Player Piano (run-of-the-mill dystopia, tedious read) and Timequake (weird small-mindedness; bitterness and cynicism pervades).
I don’t believe that Vonnegut is necessarily among the greatest novelists as producer of novels as a literary art form, but I do believe his ideas about how to be a human being are hugely important. If there is any author that I think people should read, it is Vonnegut. Even more so than people who I think wrote better novels.
People should read Vonnegut the way some people read the Bible, as a source of moral instruction.
There’s a lot of powerful stuff in here, including a non-religious passion play about Jesus that is a total highlight. A lot of great thoughts and a lot of great quotes. And just really a lot of great thoughts on how to be a human being.
His entire oeuvre (with exception of Timequake and Player Piano) should be studied and read and inculcated in children by good liberal parents everywhere.
This is a collection of Vonnegut’s essays, speeches, short stories and other artifacts with some original writing tying everything together. It’s not a whole lot dissimilar to his later novels but without an overarching plot. It mostly covers the period 1974 - 1979 or so. It is very good.
It’s not even terribly dated. Not even the cold war stuff. It doesn’t feel like an artifact at all. It also reminds me of the importance of Vonnegut. He is not my favorite author really, though I do think he is really great. I read most of his novels about ten years ago and loved all of them except for Player Piano (run-of-the-mill dystopia, tedious read) and Timequake (weird small-mindedness; bitterness and cynicism pervades).
I don’t believe that Vonnegut is necessarily among the greatest novelists as producer of novels as a literary art form, but I do believe his ideas about how to be a human being are hugely important. If there is any author that I think people should read, it is Vonnegut. Even more so than people who I think wrote better novels.
People should read Vonnegut the way some people read the Bible, as a source of moral instruction.
There’s a lot of powerful stuff in here, including a non-religious passion play about Jesus that is a total highlight. A lot of great thoughts and a lot of great quotes. And just really a lot of great thoughts on how to be a human being.
His entire oeuvre (with exception of Timequake and Player Piano) should be studied and read and inculcated in children by good liberal parents everywhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)