| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中正大學 === 外國語文研究所 === 90 === Abstract
Fatalistic perspective assertions permeate throughout Kurt Vonnegut’s fiction Most of the commentators and readers seem to treat Vonnegut as a believer of fatalism. He seems to advocate “resigned acceptance” and encourage “passive behaviors” of his protagonist, Billy Pilgrim, in his Slaughterhouse-Five. Vonnegut even describes human condition as “bugs trapped in amber,” for he had seen too many dark sides in human nature. But this thought still leave to be controversial. And yet I prefer taking him as a fighter to seeing him a fatalist from my observation in the novel.
Although, we could see many fatalistic assertions such as “So it goes,” “There is no why,” and “The moment is structured that way” to emphasize the thought that Vonnegut seems to approve such fatalistic attitude of his protagonist. However, like his protagonist, Billy, Vonnegut could have withdrawn from the reality into a personal illusionary fantasy and pretended there was nothing bad at all after witnessing the firestorm in Dresden. Instead, he took twenty-three years to collect enough information to finish his masterpiece, Slaughterhouse-Five. Vonnegut seemed to be sad and affected by war deeply for it seemed that he imprisoned himself into his fiction when the subject was concerned with the bombing at Dresden. In Slaughterhouse-Five, the author, Vonnegut, describes Billy seems to be imprisoned into his fate; but the author also offers his protagonist free will to start his preaching about the futility of free will after surviving from the plane crash. When we inspect this anecdote carefully enough, we would see that Vonnegut seems to satirize the humanity here instead of promoting the fatalistic concepts in the novel.
This thesis is an attempt to explore a possibility that Vonnegut’s employing fatalistic perspective assertions in Slaughterhouse-Five aim to offer a protest and further to satirize the injustice and inhumanity to this world. Therefore, Vonnegut acts more like a fighter than a fatalist. Thus, chapter one focuses on Vonnegut’s life and war experiences. From his negative view to human nature, I attempt to reinforce the impression that Vonnegut believes there is a possibility that this universe runs by fate, chance, and necessity. And yet, from the fact that this book also took him twenty-three years to gather information and compose, implying a message that Vonnegut tends to arouse people’s attention to notice the devastation of Dresden really happened. And also through his satirical attacks to suggest Vonnegut’s very message of this novel seems to indicate human should surpass human limitation to uphold the inherited good nature. In chapter two, the focus is put on how Vonnegut employs the frame of aliens’ abducting Billy, and infuses the author’s personal philosophy from these aliens, and thus creates a fatalistic world in the novel. He introduces the aliens’ concepts of time and death and integrates them to bring in a world full of fatalistic phrases in Slaughterhouse-Five. As to chapter three, it mainly discusses how Vonnegut presents his protagonist is intervened by fate during his war time and postwar lives; and how Billy under his unmet psychological need creates a fanatical alien world, the Tralfamadore, to escape and survive.
In conclusion, I conclude that besides fatalism acts as a writing technique in Slaughterhouse-Five to let his unspeakable story to be told, Vonnegut’s true message or spirit of the book is to convey that the past cannot be changed but we can change the future through making a good use of present despite fate’s intervention. Also, we should fear no death but learn the true meaning of life. Although, wars come like glaciers, we still could sustain our inherited goodness and learn to live with love and compassion, and hope no war again. Just break the amber, which symbolizes the bondage of human nature, if we dare to try we would turn the inevitability into possibility of daily events. Thus, Fatalism in Slaughterhouse-Five should act like a writing tool for Vonnegut to offer his subtle protest to the world’s inhumanity and injustice instead of advocating the concept of fatalism here.
|
|---|
