I did a search and didn’t see this specifically. There may be comments buried in other threads, but I don’t want to read a dozen threads on the off chance there is something relevant in them.
I just read Cat’s Cradle. I am perplexed. I don’t really know what to make of it. I kind of gather that Vonnegut had a couple points,
the futility and stupidity of humanity
that all religions are made up and pretty dumb, so why not enjoy this one he made up to make the case
I’m still trying to process the novel. Anyone have any comments, observations, thoughts? Help me understand.
Either way, rest easy. Both are being adapted to the screen by James V. Hart, mastermind behind the flawless adaptations of The Last Mimzy and Contact.
It may help you to remember that Vonnegut wrote the book while the Cuban Missile Crisis was still very fresh in everyone’s minds.
And, in case you missed the joke, “Felix” is the Latin word for happy. So, the mad scientist named Felix Hoenikker? His name was, basically, “Happy Hannukkah.”
I thought it was a great novel when I first read it when I was fifteen. Reread it again a few years ago and my opinion was confirmed – as well as noticing things I hadn’t noticed before.
The key to the book is in the final paragraph, I will say. It ties in all the themes.
I should probably re-read it. Going by memory, it’s my favorite Vonegut novel, but it’s been … (holy shit! am I that old?) over 20 years since I’ve read it.
Tiger got to hunt, Bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder, “Why, why, why?”
Tiger got to sleep, Bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand
The above quotes pretty much sum it up for me. Great book!
Cat’s Cradle is not bad but you really should read Breakfast of Champions and Slaughterhouse Five. With those, you won’t have the questions you have now.
Yah, not a lot of happy endings in Vonnegut’s work. I was mostly amazed at how bad the Father was, and his three children turned out so badly, then they took the most amazing thing he ever discovered and destroyed the world with it. The protagonist got caught in the middle, I guess. It certainly makes sense that it was right after the Cuban Missle Crisis. Wasn’t the Island they ended up on supposed to be very like Haiti?
Hey, my sig is REALLY appropriate in this thread.
My theory about Vonnegut’s novels, which I’ve posted here before, is that modern science has demolished our illusions about man’s place in the universe, leaving us existentially adrift. For example:
[ul]
[li]Slaughterhouse-Five, based on the idea from General Relativity that past and future exist fixed in eternity, posits that human notions of free will are an illusion, illustrated by the character who experiences his life non-sequentially and by the Tralfamadorans who exist in four dimensions and explain that one day they will accidently destroy the universe because they did/are/will.[/li][li]Galapagos, based on the idea that evolution has no goals and no values, has the last survivors of the human race eventually evolve into seal-like creatures because warm coats of waterproof fur prove to have more survival value than intelligence.[/li][li]And Cats Cradle has that the habitability of the Earth is an accident, in the novel supposing that liquid water is metastable and once the solid form is accidently turned loose destroying the ability of Earth to sustain life (it was written as an antiwar theme but could just as easily have been an anticorporate ecology theme).[/li][/ul]In other words, I would suppose Vonnegut to be to science fiction what Nietzsche was to philosophy: pointing out the implications of an universe that is utterly amoral and meaningless.
