In an alternative history novel like Never Let Me Go, the audience presumes a happy ending where the main character finds a way to break free from the norms of life and becomes an advocate for change in their society. However, in Ishiguro’s novel, he emphasizes that the characters do not revolt against the donation program and what it stands for. Therefore, this has led me to the question: why do the clones never rebel against their fate?
Aside from the fact that Ishiguro states in his interview that he wanted to write a story where the characters stayed with their fate, I believe that growing up in Hailsham makes their future into normality where they do not know anything else aside from their future. For example, after Miss Lucy went on her little tangent to the students about the donations, “there was surprisingly little discussion about what she’d said. If it did come up, people tended to say: ‘Well so what? We already knew all that’” (Ishiguro, 82). It seems they have already accepted their fate because they do not know life outside of Hailsham. Even after leaving the cottages, it seems as if the clones want to be donors because it is their purpose in life. Growing up, if someone told you that you were destined to be this superstar football player, then you would live your life with the expectation to go to the NFL one day. Similar to the clones, all their life, they are expected to give up their organs at a certain age. When Tommy is about to give his fourth donation, Kathy states that “[a] donor ‘on a fourth,’ even one who’s been pretty unpopular up till then, is treated with a special respect” (Ishiguro, 278). It is as if the clones want to be donors to fulfill societies’ needs and be appreciated for what they have done.
To delve deeper, if the students did rebel, where would they run to? This whole book reminds me of those animal breeding farms where cattle (or any animal) live to provide more food for the human population. It is no secret that the cruelty used in those places is unethical and that the animals are kept in tight pens, so they do not escape. Tommy’s drawings of these animals may allude to the fact that they are being treated the same way (but more indirectly.) The clones cannot run away just as these animals cannot, and the humans in the novel see the students as a different species who do not have souls, just as we do not regard animals with the same ethics as humans. Ultimately, it seems that the clones submit to their fate because of early acceptance, their want to contribute to society, and because there is nowhere for them to hide from what is inevitable.
I completely agree with your take on why the clones never rebel. I particularly find it fascinating how their acceptance is so heavily motivated not by a constant verbal affirmation that they are going to die at a young age, but instead by a *lack* of affirmation. It is ultimately the unspoken that holds more importance in Never Let Me Go. Miss Emily tells Kathy and Tommy that "people did their best not to think about you. And if they did, they tried to convince themselves you weren't really like us. That you were less than human, so it didn't matter" (263). Non-donors never explicitly or forcefully pushed a message that the clones couldn't and shouldn't rebel, but rather ignored them and silently subjected them to a rung on the ladder that was far lower. This is surprisingly effective as it works on a subconscious level, thus causing the donors to not even think about rebelling. And if they do, the rebellion is surrounded by a sense of impossibility or infeasibility. Furthermore, the group of people who claim to "look out for" the donors (the Hailsham administrators) only perform a very limited advocacy for them. The people in their society who "have their backs" the most are people who still are not able or willing to change their circumstances, which is quite tragic. And regardless of the advocates' comfort with this fact, it remains true that their limited ability in fighting for the donors' rights subliminally communicates that the donors should be grateful even though ultimately nothing can save them. I am not certain of whether or not Ishiguro intended for this parallel to be drawn, but I see this kind of subconscious and heavily disguised oppression against marginalized groups in our own world.
ReplyDeleteI agree that because these children grew up hearing about their purpose, they are less likely to question it or fight it as adults. There are plenty of things that make sense to us because we’ve grown up around them. We accept them because it’s all we’ve ever known—like the fact that there are people with unnecessarily enormous amounts of money, and others with nothing but themselves. It seems unjust yet solvable, but many of us just shrug and feel that’s how it has been and how it always will be.
ReplyDeleteEven when Kathy and Tommy do make an attempt to fight their fate, it’s still within the system that has determined their life in the past. The only reason they do so is because of the rumor that one can ‘request’ a deferral. Despite having the freedom to travel independently and go anywhere within the country, they don’t feel they personally have any authority over their fate. They feel they must go to a figure of more importance (at least in their eyes) in order to change it.
I find it hard to believe that Kathy and Tommy couldn’t drive somewhere they can’t be found. As small as England is, there must be some places like that. Even when they went to the art shop on their trip to Norfolk, the shopkeeper couldn’t tell they were clones. Who would be looking for the clones if they did run away? Perhaps this is a plot hole that Ishiguro, maybe purposefully, forgot, or felt didn’t need filling. It’s clear that Tommy’s angry at the fact they can’t request a deferral, as he begins “raging, shouting, flinging his fists and kicking out” (274) on their journey back to the care center. Regardless, they return and head back to the fate they are expected to have.
Perhaps it is simply because they’ve been in the system their whole lives that they cannot think outside of it. I agree it is the societal environment that normalized early death and placed honor on donations that made them so accepting. However, I cannot help feeling unsatisfied on concluding this novel. It’s almost human nature to rebel against a system as much as it is to comply. In my opinion, it’s hard to believe that the clones, as human and full of spirit as they appear to be, wouldn’t pursue life further.