As I have been reading Ishmael, I have found myself more and more frustrated with the Student. I can not say exactly why. The general feeling is that I find myself frustrated because the Student is, or at least appears, somewhat dim. However, that by itself should not frustrate me. Characters can be less intelligent yet compelling. But, the Student isn't. The Student is nameless, back-groundless, with only a few, unimportant details about his life being given to the reader. This, I believe, is what frustrates me. The way I see it, Quinn wrote the Student as a faceless representation of the reader and the intelligence of the student reflects his opinion of the intelligence of the reader. This is what annoys me. If I think the Student is dumb, clearly he doesn't represent me, the reader, the way that Quinn thinks he should. It makes the writing feel condescending, and the Student's dimwittedness the reader's own. For whatever reason it just rubs me the wrong way. Now that that's off my chest, I would like to bring up an idea within this section that I found fascinating. That idea is the laws of life.
The idea of the laws of life is, I assume, an idea that will be critical to the novel. But, more importantly, it's an incredibly interesting idea. The premise is this, if there are laws that govern flight, gravity, thermodynamics, and all the rest; why would there not be laws that govern life? For example, take a look at Newton's laws of motion. One of those laws states that an object in motion stays in motion. This is undeniably true; when not being acted upon by an opposing force. Space allowed us to truly gain an understanding of this concept. Voyager One and Two, for example, do not propel themselves any longer. In fact, they stopped propelling themselves minutes after the broke through the Earth's atmosphere. However, they continue to travel at thousands of miles per hour. There is nothing to slow them down, no opposing forces strong enough to stop them. The sun's gravitational pull on them is so weak that they actually now orbit our galactic center, if you can believe that. If there is a law like this for motion, why would there be no law like this for life? What allows a species to continue for millennia and what causes a species to die? Well, we know that unfavorable conditions and competition can cause animals to die out. Is that not a law?
In the novel, Ishmael (or Quinn's persona, I suppose) says that laws are often unsurprising. When Newton stated the law of gravity no one looked at him as though he were crazy. Everyone understands that an object falls when unsupported, it's not revolutionary. However, Ishmael argues that by creating a law you are defining a phenomenon as something to be obeyed. Laws are meant to be obeyed. Thus a natural law is something everything must obey. Continuing along this line of reasoning, the laws of life are not particularly surprising to anyone. However, by calling them natural laws you invoke a sort of reverence for them. Currently, the problem with our society is that we like to take and destroy and ignore the future. Currently, we understand that humanity is causing species to die off, ice caps to melt, atmospheres to degrade, death through pollution, and all the rest. People understand this, it's not exactly something that can be swept under the rug anymore, much as people may try. Humanity, at it's core, does not look to the future. It's simply how we're wired. Humanity sees itself as king and Earth as its kingdom. Whether or not we continue to be a tyrant is up to us. If we choose to define the laws of life and acknowledge that they apply even to us, the wise and powerful king of 'noble' blood, then we take a step towards benevolence. It's a hard pill to swallow, but the 'king' must follow the same rules as the commoners. If we don't, we die.
We know that unfavorable conditions and competition can cause animals to die out. Humans don't compete with any other species. If life were a footrace and every species entered, it would be like humanity showed up in a car. We win every time. However, there is a second part to the first statement. Unfavorable conditions. What does global warming create? Unfavorable conditions. Pollution? Unfavorable conditions. Overfishing, draining aquifers too fast, dropping nukes, cutting down rain forest? Unfavorable conditions. Humanity is killing not just itself, but all life because we see ourselves above the laws of life.
"No man is above the law and no man is below it: nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it." - Teddy Roosevelt
Chef C Thunder serving his daily special: food for the mind! Your analysis on laws, and how humans obey the laws of life, was enlightening. This book is thought-provoking. We are our own demise. BTW, that T.R. quote at the end was becoming.
ReplyDeleteA thoughtful discussion of both the style/tone of the novel and some of its thematic concerns. I think I would also be annoyed by what seems like a condescending tone, but perhaps you and I are not Quinn's target audience...Would this be more effective if someone did not agree with the major premise?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad some of the ideas are able to get through despite disliking the style.
Interesting post thunderclap newman. I think maybe part of leaving the identity of the Student a mystery is so that the reader can pretend he/she is the Student. All we know is that he used to be interested in some sort of revolution but wound up in the machine anyways. Not that different from a lot of people. Just a thought. Also, loved the quote from my boy Teddy Ros. Keep up the good work
ReplyDeleteIt's funny that you began by expressing your frustration with the narrator because I had felt the same frustration towards him too and could not exactly pinpoint why. After all, he is just a student who is trying to learn. At first I thought it was simply because the lack of knowledge about him makes it difficult to connect with him as a character, but now I definitely see how Quinn does seem to be talking down to his readers by using Ishmael as a platform to project his elaborate ideas. Maybe instead his intention was to make his work profound and pedagogic rather than aiming it necessarily in a condescending direction, but I certainly did get that vibe a few times while reading and didn't actually call it to my attention until reading this post.
ReplyDelete