Cat's Cradle Chapters 5-8

So a quick apology--I realized glancing over the last book club that I said chapters 6-8 for this week, apparently deciding 5 didn't exist. It however seems to be a really important chapter so I'm changing my mind and deciding it does, in fact, exist.

So, want to know my favorite part of writing about this book assuming you're reading along at home? I don't need to break down every single passage like I do with 50 Shades!

Alright--*rolls up imaginary sleeves*--let's get this show started!

Chapter 5 and 6 is a response from one of the members of Johna's karass Newt Hoenikker, the youngest son of Dr Felix Hoenikker. I imagine we will get to meet all three of the "good" doctors children, but we meet Newt first. He is in university, a member of the same frat as Johna was in his university days, and has just flunked out, and he tells us about the day the bomb dropped.

I want to take a moment here to say how much I love Vonnegut's writing, he gives us a letter talking about what happened and still managed to show, not tell. So we're given characterization of the Hoenikker family.

Newt describes the family dynamic: his Mother died in childbirth with him, so his sister Angela (22 at the time) is the head of the family and has devoted her entire life to caring for her father and brothers. She has one hobby, Newt tells us, the clarinet, other than that, her whole life is her family. Given the setting of this book that doesn't surprise me that we're meeting a sister-mommy*. His brother Frank, we're told, has been missing for about two years, and is described in slightly sociopathic terms. We hear about him putting bugs into jars, and shaking the jars to make the bugs fight, and punches his sister and laughs as she rolls around in pain crying.

His father was... well, Felix is an interesting case of innocence not equating morality. The man is the father of the atomic bomb and when testing, a co-worker turns to him and says "Science has now met sin." to which Felix's response is "What's sin?" Felix is described as a totally absent parent, needing to be coddled and cared for like a child both by his family and his employers. He seems uninterested in those around him, and works on things as they strike his fancy. We are given the impression that in his childish simplicity, he is quite happy: even though he is responsible for the atomic bomb, there is seemingly no guilt of it.

Newt tells us that his father never played with him as a kid, and the day of the bomb was the first time he had tried to. Newt was playing with trucks on the carpet (or so he assumes, since his sister has commented he often did that) while his father played with a bit of string from a manuscript sent to him by a man in prison. The man was looking for ideas of what kind of bomb he should use, but we're told that Felix never read anything that wasn't a scientific journal (which I think is the most vilifying thing I've ever seen Vonnegut write about a character) and so he probably never read it, he just liked the string. He was making a cat's cradle (title drop!) and decided that he would sit and play with little Newt. So he sits next to his youngest son and starts shoving this bit of string in his face singing an adapted version of "rock a bye baby". Newt tells us that he remembers his father reeking of cigars and looking absolutely terrifying and ran away crying, frightened by his father.

Newt, being 6, finds his brother fighting bugs and is fascinated by that because, well, 6 year old boy. Angela later comes out looking for him and scolds Newt for running away from their father, saying that he hurt him terribly. I want to dwell on this a moment, since, well, Felix has never really taken time to play with his six year old son, ever. He does so on a whim and is hurt when he scares the child so much that he runs away crying. Felix, on top of being oblivious, is deeply self-centered. Angela and Newt start fighting, because Newt keeps just calling his father ugly and scary and saying he hates him, and Angela slaps him. This at first was shocking to me, and adult-Newt seems totally blase writing it, but then I remembered time-context, so I won't read too much into it. Angela is supposed to be emotional about it as she screams that their father just won the war, but we're not supposed to see her as bad for slapping a child, largely because of how she's been forced into the sister-mommy role. This is the point Frank gut-punches her and she rolls around in pain, calling to their father for help. He pokes his head out, but as Frank predicted, no interference comes. Newt tells us that he never even asked about the event after the fact.

Chapter 7 and 8 are about Newt as an adult. His post-scripts, telling us that his family is not "illustrious" with him being a midget (I am aware it's not a great term, but it's what the book uses) and his brother Frank being wanted by the FBI, Florida police, and Treasury Department for running stolen cars to Cuba. He suggests that perhaps "glamorous" is a more fitting word. Newt also tells us though he has flunked out of school and is no longer a frat-member, he is still happy, and mentions he is getting married soon. Johna then tells us that Newt married a Ukrainian dancer named Zinka. This was fine until shortly after the wedding Newt discovered she was not 23 as she had said but 42. Old enough to be his Mother. Newt says that he has no regrets and the matter is between him and Zinka, but the media is, well, the media. I'm not quite sure what to make of this, to be honest. It feels a touch random, but I think this is meant to give us a frame of reference for Newt so we can decide if he is a reliable narrator (since he does narrate two chapters in his letter) or perhaps is just to give us closure on what happened to the character. If I look at it as determining the reliability of the narrator, than I would say that Newt seems reliable. He doesn't lie- he simply refuses to talk about the things he doesn't wish to talk about, and so I would say that his willingness to speak means he is willing to tell the whole truth.

What do you make of these characters? Do you think I'm over or underestimating Felix, or getting chapters 7 and 8 wrong with my interpretation of Newt? I admit I'm a little miffed on how to interpret that one. 


On the 26th we'll cover chapters 9-12. Tune in Thursday for 50 Shades!



*I use the term sister-mommy because of an old English teacher of mine, and I now think she may have coined the term for the trope because I can't find a TV-tropes page to quite fit what I want. I linked to promoted to parent because it was the closest, but sister-mommy means something a little different. It's the case of an older sister having to step into a mother role for her younger siblings and basically give up their own lives/freedom/wants to take care of them. The sister-mommy is usually shown to be a sympathetic if not admirable and pitiable character. From the little of Angela I've seen so far this seems spot on.

Cat's Cradle Book Club meeting, chapter 1-4

“Hey wasn't this supposed to be up yesterday?” Yes, yes it was, but Saturday was moving day (Where The Boy and I escaped the EVIL clutches of the student neighborhood and have now taken sheltered in a much nicer more central area!) and the internet fairy doesn't come until Thursday and though I had this ready, I was without a way to upload it. So, you get it a day late. Here, take this Dachshund as an apology. 

Now, while I am in the process of making slightly embarrassing admissions: I didn't actually page through this book when I picked it as a candidate. When I was picking candidates I walked to my bookshelf and yanked every one that I had been meaning to read, (or re-read) that I thought would give me something to pick at. Having read Vonnegut before I had less concern that he would deliver than some of the other authors on the list (like the delightful but straight forward Wallace). It wasn't until I managed to steal ten minutes to sit down with the book (yes, it had taken me until Sunday to do so) that I realized that each chapter was about 2 pages.

....

Well then.

So I am going to do the first 4 chapters, because if you guys are anything like me there is absolutely no way you did not read ahead, and if you didn't it will take you about three minutes to do so. I'm doing the first 4 because they fit together nicely as an intro.

Alright, let's get started, shall we?

I usually skip over the reviews for a book, at least if I already own it. They're there to sell me the thing, and I've already bought it, why should I bother? Still, this time for what ever reason I felt compelled to, the copy of the book I have was printed in 1998 so yours may not have the same reviews as mine (do they change that sort of thing?) but one jumped out at me.

“Our finest black humorist.

...we laugh in self-defense.”

-The Atlantic Monthly

I'm not entirely sure why of all the passages this one jumped out at me, perhaps because it's so similar to a line I picked up somewhere that I internalized at a young age (“Sometimes you either need to laugh or cry. Might as well laugh.”) but it brings up what I know of Vonnegut. A war vet and brutal pragmatist (“Every sentence must do one of two things—reveal character or advance the action.” anyone?) and his other book that I have read (Slaughter House 5) very much draws from those experiences. My Dad knew a bit about Vonnegut's history when I made him read Slaughter House 5 (I needed someone to talk to about it) and mentioned that Vonnegut had always been very anti-war (being 18 I didn't do things like read up authors histories). (From Wiki) "He was a citizen he was a lifelong supporter of the American Civil Liberties Union and a critical pacifist intellectual. He was known for his humanist beliefs and was honorary president of the American Humanist Association". Reading these two lines brought all this to mind, and tells me about Vonnegut's motivations (or one theory on what they might be). Vonnegut is a war-vet who has become a pacifist, having been a "baby" at the time he went to war (according to the intro of Slaughter House 5).

Vonnegut writes about war, in some capacity or another, in most of (all of?) his writing. However he doesn't just write grim gritty war actions novelizations. He writes (often surreal) satire. He writes about war and then laughs at it. While there is a lot to be said about the courage it can take to write about your own gritty horrors*, I think it takes even more courage to then turn around and laugh at them.

The preface to the book is interesting, too.

Nothing in this book is true.

“Live by the foma* that makes you brave and kind and healthy and happy.”

The Books of Bokonon. I: 5

*Harmless untruths

This idea will come up often in the first four chapters. Chapter one our narrator introduces himself as Johan (though his parents named him John) because for what ever reason he has been compelled to certain places at certain times. He goes on to give us an idea of his age

When I was a younger man – two wives ago, 250, 000 cigarettes ago, 3,000 quarts of booze ago...

that he was writing a book. “The Day the World Ended.” that was to be a factual series of events of what “important” Americans had done the day when the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Jonah then starts to tell us about Bokonon which is the made up religion that is outright declared to be made up of “bittersweet lies”. The gist of it (for those of you not reading along at home) is that we are all divided into teams (karass) to fulfill some aspect of God's Will. An individual is never to know what this is, just that we are. The books goes on to tell us that if we find ourselves tangled up with a person for no discernible reason then odds are we are members of the same karass. Bokonon preaches equality, and a place and purpose for all of Gods creations. Bokonon is also very upfront about the fact that it is made up entirely of foma.

That is chapters 1 and 2. Chapter 3 tells the story of a woman who claims to understand God and His Ways of Working perfectly. She is, shockingly, arrogant to think so. She believes that God holds all the same opinions and beliefs as she does (the example we're given is that He likes people in sail boats better than people in motorboats) and goes on to say she freaked out if she ever saw a worm. The book (quoting from the Book of Bokonon) calls her a fool, but also calls himself (and anyone else who thinks they can see what God is Doing) a fool.

The next chapter Jonah tells us that the goal of the book we are reading is to find as many members of his karass as possible, and to find out what they were doing the day the bomb dropped in hopes of getting an idea. He is defining people as members of his karass by their lives being inexplicably tangled in his own, and rattles off a few (I'll get into them more as they come up) and the chapter ends with him firing a letter off to the youngest son of Dr Felic Hoenikker (one of the Father's of the bomb) Newton Hoenikker asking for what he remembers going on that day even though he would have been just a kid.

There is one thing that struck me in the chapter that I haven't mentioned yet, and it's the “Bokononist warning” that we are offered. First we are told the one that resides in the very first sentence of the Books of Bokonon:

“All of the true things I am about to tell you are shameless lies.”

The narrator goes on to offer his own for this book,

“Anyone unable to understand how useful a religion can be founded on lies will not understand this book either.

So be it.”

I first read that and laughed. It basically spelled out any speculations I had about Bokononisim leading up to this point. It's a religion for people who don't actually want to practice religion, simply the security blanket that (according to non-theists) religion offers. The moral absolution, the ability to trust some higher power when it comes to all of the big scary things in life because they're all part of God's plan (the book has yet to touch on holidays yet, but I will be surprised if there was not some Christmas stand in). It makes sense from an author who is a Humanist.

I write this as an Agnostic who was raised in a mixed-religion household (French Catholic & Jewish.) and I can totally understand why someone would embrace that. I want to scream whenever I'm facing down some big scary life issue and someone cheerfully tells me it's all in God's Plan. Really? I'm dealing with (Insert issue. Unemployment/illness/a loved one in danger) because God figured I was due? Or that (insert consequence. Not being able to work due to playing caretaker/because of illness) would build character? Through often heroic will-power I just grit my teeth and offer some generic platitude because while I disagree entirely, I understand that is what they believe, and that it helped them through hard times. If it's something you can buy into I can see how incredibly comforting the idea that everything happens for a reason is, but it's not a theology I've ever been able to sink my teeth into. To each their own. Which is why Bokononisim makes me giggle (as I believe it is supposed to) because it is sounds much like the creation of a non-theist.

So, what did you at home make of this? What are your thoughts on Bokonon? Do you think I'm way off with thinking it's meant to be a religion for people who don't like religion? Do you think personal responsibility will come up as a theme (I suspect it will be)?

Also while religion is an obvious theme here, and the author was Humanist (which is closely related to Atheist as far as my understanding goes, but I will do more research into it before the next book club meeting) I will stress the commenting rule of "Don't be a dick". Religion is open for discussion, but not debate. People's beliefs are what they are and there is to be no policing of others' beliefs.

On that cheerful note, sound off in the comments, and read chapters 6-8 for May 12! Next Sunday is Ender's Game and a Thursday will have a guest post for 50 Shades! Probably!

*You can see how much he struggled in a little more depth if you ever read the foreword to Slaughter House 5