Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel is a poignant exploration of human identity, ethics, and biopower.
Never Let Me Go #
Please describe the premise of the Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel “Never Let Me Go”? #
Kazuo Ishiguro’s novel “Never Let Me Go” is a poignant and thought-provoking exploration of human identity, ethics, and the nature of society. The story is set in a dystopian version of late 20th-century England and revolves around the lives of three friends—Kathy H., Tommy, and Ruth—who grow up together at a seemingly idyllic boarding school called Hailsham.
The narrative unfolds through Kathy’s retrospective narration as she looks back on her childhood and adolescence at Hailsham. The children at Hailsham are not ordinary; they are clones, created and raised for the sole purpose of eventually donating their organs to cure diseases and extend the lives of non-cloned humans. This unsettling reality is gradually revealed as the characters come to understand their predetermined fate.
At Hailsham, the children are encouraged to create art and engage in creative activities, which are later collected by a mysterious figure known as Madame. The significance of their artwork and its connection to their value as clones is a recurring theme in the novel, symbolizing a desperate attempt to assert their humanity.
The story delves into the complexities of the relationships between Kathy, Tommy, and Ruth, exploring themes of love, jealousy, and betrayal. As they grow older and leave Hailsham, they confront the harsh realities of their existence and struggle with their limited time and the inevitability of their fate.
“Never Let Me Go” raises profound ethical questions about the morality of cloning and the commodification of human life. Ishiguro’s subtle and restrained prose amplifies the emotional depth of the characters’ experiences, making the novel a powerful meditation on what it means to be human and the inherent dignity of every individual, regardless of their origins.
Let’s focus on characters’ experiences - there were two classes of pupils at Hailsham, right? #
In Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go,” the students at Hailsham do not explicitly belong to two distinct classes of pupils. However, there are notable distinctions in how certain groups of students experience and perceive their lives at Hailsham, as well as how their fates are managed later on. These distinctions can be subtly interpreted as dividing lines within the student population.
Hailsham Students:
Main Characters: Kathy H., Tommy, and Ruth are central figures whose experiences are deeply explored. They represent the typical Hailsham students who are initially sheltered from the full reality of their existence as clones destined for organ donation.
Education and Creativity: The students at Hailsham are encouraged to excel in academics and artistic pursuits. Their artwork is considered important, though the true purpose of these creative endeavors is ambiguous and troublingly tied to their humanity’s recognition. Caretakers and Guardians:
Miss Emily and Miss Lucy: The guardians play a crucial role in the students’ lives. Miss Emily, the headmistress, is a staunch defender of Hailsham’s mission to provide a nurturing environment for the clones. Miss Lucy, a more sympathetic guardian, struggles with the ethical implications of the students’ fate and believes they should be fully aware of their destiny.
Later Lives and Roles:
Carers and Donors: As the students mature, they are assigned roles as “carers” or “donors.” Carers, like Kathy, provide support and care for donors, those undergoing organ donation procedures. Carers have a temporary reprieve from becoming donors themselves, but their fate remains the same.
Differences in Acceptance: The students show varying levels of acceptance and understanding of their roles. Characters like Ruth seek to find meaning and control within the confines of their existence, while Tommy’s frustration with his lack of artistic talent and his eventual quest for a “deferral” highlights his desire for a semblance of normalcy and love.
While there aren’t two formal classes of pupils, the novel does subtly differentiate between those who become carers and those who immediately become donors, as well as those who seek understanding or resistance versus those who accept their fate more passively. These nuanced distinctions shape the characters’ experiences and interactions, reflecting their internal struggles and the overarching ethical dilemmas of the society they inhabit.
What of the pipe dreams of proving their “humanness” in order to escape fate? #
In Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go,” the concept of proving one’s “humanness” to escape fate is a central theme that manifests through various “pipe dreams” held by the characters. These dreams revolve around the hope that their artistic talents and personal relationships can somehow grant them a reprieve from their predetermined destiny as organ donors.
The Art Gallery and the Theory of Deferral:
The Art Gallery: At Hailsham, the students are encouraged to create art, which is collected by Madame for her gallery. The students believe that their artwork is a testament to their souls and individual humanity. This belief is tied to a hope that their creativity and expression can demonstrate their worthiness of a different fate.
The Theory of Deferral: A significant aspect of this pipe dream is the rumor of “deferrals,” a supposed program where a couple in love might be granted a delay in their organ donations if they can prove the authenticity of their relationship. This theory becomes a beacon of hope for Tommy and Kathy, who believe that their love and the depth of their connection might save them from their grim future.
Character Reactions and Pursuits:
Tommy: Tommy becomes obsessed with the idea that his lack of artistic ability is why he struggles to prove his humanity. He begins creating intricate drawings, hoping they will serve as evidence of his soul and his capacity for love and creativity.
Kathy and Ruth: Kathy, while initially skeptical, eventually embraces the hope of deferral with Tommy. Ruth, on the other hand, harbors guilt and regret for the way she has manipulated and hurt her friends. Before her death, Ruth urges Tommy and Kathy to seek a deferral, expressing her belief in their love and the possibility of escaping their fate, albeit briefly.
The Harsh Reality:
Miss Emily and Madame’s Revelation: The novel reaches a poignant climax when Kathy and Tommy confront Madame and Miss Emily about the deferral rumor. They learn that the gallery was never intended to grant deferrals but to convince society of the clones’ humanity and the ethical need for humane treatment. The artwork was meant to demonstrate that the clones had souls, yet society ultimately chose to ignore this moral implication in favor of the benefits derived from their organs.
Acceptance of Fate: This revelation shatters the characters’ hopes, leaving them to confront the inevitability of their fate. Kathy and Tommy’s realization underscores the tragedy of their existence—their dreams of proving their humanity were always futile in a world that chose to commodify them.
The pipe dreams of proving their “humanness” serve as a powerful narrative device in “Never Let Me Go.” They highlight the characters’ desperate desire for recognition and a different future, while ultimately exposing the profound ethical failures of the society that created and exploited them. The novel’s exploration of these dreams poignantly underscores the central themes of identity, humanity, and the moral costs of scientific and societal advancement.
If we try to speculate, which role was to be more emotionally, or existentially taxing - the role of a donor, or the one of a carer? #
Speculating on the roles of donors and carers in Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go,” both roles entail profound emotional and existential challenges, but the nature and impact of these challenges differ significantly.
The Role of a Donor #
Physical Suffering and Dehumanization:
Physical Pain and Decline: Donors undergo multiple organ removal surgeries until they “complete,” which is a euphemism for death. This process involves significant physical suffering, loss of bodily autonomy, and gradual physical decline.
Objectification: Donors are dehumanized, treated as mere sources of organs rather than individuals with personal identities and desires. This objectification strips them of their humanity, leading to a profound existential crisis.
Awareness of Fate:
Inevitability of Death: Donors live with the constant awareness of their impending and unavoidable deaths. This foreknowledge creates a pervasive sense of doom and existential despair.
Lack of Agency: Donors have no control over their destinies. This lack of agency contributes to a sense of powerlessness and existential frustration, as they cannot alter the course of their lives.
The Role of a Carer #
Emotional Burden and Compassion Fatigue:
Witnessing Suffering: Carers like Kathy are tasked with looking after donors, often witnessing the physical and emotional deterioration of those they care for. This constant exposure to suffering can lead to compassion fatigue and emotional exhaustion.
Forming and Losing Bonds: Carers form close bonds with donors, only to lose them repeatedly. This cycle of attachment and loss can be emotionally devastating, as carers watch their friends and loved ones “complete.”
Delayed Fate and Existential Reflection:
Temporary Reprieve: Carers have a temporary reprieve from becoming donors themselves, allowing them time to reflect on their existence and fate. This period can be existentially taxing as they grapple with the knowledge of their eventual destiny.
Guilt and Helplessness: Carers may feel guilt over their relative freedom and helplessness in changing the fates of those they care for. This guilt, combined with the anticipation of their future role as donors, can lead to profound existential angst.
Comparative Analysis #
Donors: The role of a donor is more immediately taxing due to the physical pain and direct confrontation with mortality. The dehumanization and lack of agency compound the existential distress, making the donor’s experience one of acute physical and emotional suffering.
Carers: The role of a carer, while involving less immediate physical pain, is emotionally taxing in a different way. Carers endure the continuous emotional burden of losing those they care for, along with the looming shadow of their eventual fate as donors. The extended period of existential reflection and the guilt associated with their role can be deeply distressing.
While both roles are profoundly challenging, the nature of the suffering differs. Donors face a more immediate and visceral form of suffering, whereas carers endure prolonged emotional and existential torment. In terms of which role is more taxing, it can be argued that the prolonged psychological and emotional burden of a carer, combined with the anticipation of their own fate, makes their experience uniquely and deeply challenging. However, the extreme physical and existential suffering of donors cannot be understated, making it a highly subjective determination.
As a thought experiment, how much would it be in the interest of the school, or in the interest of pupils to have false narratives of possible escape from the fate circulated? #
The circulation of false narratives about possible escape from their fate among the pupils at Hailsham in Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go” can be analyzed from both the perspectives of the school’s interests and the pupils’ interests. This thought experiment explores the potential motivations and implications for each party.
In the Interest of the School #
Psychological Control:
Maintaining Hope: Allowing false narratives of possible escape to circulate might help maintain a level of hope among the pupils. This hope could prevent despair and rebellion, making the students more manageable and compliant. By giving the students something to aspire to, even if it’s unattainable, the school can maintain psychological control over them.
Focus on Achievement: The belief in potential deferrals or ways to prove their humanity could motivate the students to engage more deeply in their education and artistic endeavors. This focus on achievement and creativity aligns with the school’s goal of creating a semblance of normalcy and encouraging productivity.
Social Harmony:
Reduced Conflict: If students believe there is a chance, however slim, to escape their fate, it could reduce conflict and unrest. The possibility of escape provides a psychological buffer that may prevent the pupils from feeling utterly hopeless and desperate, which could otherwise lead to resistance or despair-driven behaviors.
Inculcation of Values: By fostering a belief in the importance of art and love as means of proving one’s humanity, the school reinforces societal values that justify the existence of the clones. This inculcation supports the broader societal acceptance of the clones’ purpose while placating the pupils with a semblance of higher purpose.
In the Interest of the Pupils #
Psychological Relief:
Hope and Purpose: Believing in the possibility of escape or deferral can provide psychological relief. This hope gives the pupils a sense of purpose and something to strive for, which can mitigate the existential despair associated with their predetermined fate.
Enhanced Well-being: The psychological comfort derived from hope can enhance the pupils’ overall well-being, allowing them to find moments of happiness and meaning in their otherwise grim lives.
Motivation and Agency:
Personal Growth: The belief in a possible escape can motivate pupils to develop their talents and form meaningful relationships. This motivation fosters personal growth and the development of skills and emotional depth, even if the ultimate goal is unattainable.
Sense of Agency: Even a false sense of agency can be empowering. By believing they have some control over their fate, pupils might feel more autonomous and engaged in their lives, making their experiences more fulfilling despite the underlying falsehood.
Ethical Considerations and Consequences #
Manipulation and Betrayal:
Ethical Dilemma: Deliberately circulating false narratives is ethically questionable as it involves manipulation and deception. The eventual realization of the truth can lead to feelings of betrayal and deep psychological trauma, as seen when Kathy and Tommy discover the futility of their hopes.
Long-term Impact: The short-term benefits of maintaining hope might be overshadowed by the long-term damage caused by the ultimate disillusionment. When the false narratives are inevitably debunked, the resulting despair and anger could have profound and damaging effects on the pupils’ mental health.
Moral Responsibility:
- Institutional Ethics: From an ethical standpoint, the school’s responsibility should be to provide the pupils with truthful information and support them in coming to terms with their reality. Deception, even with ostensibly good intentions, undermines trust and the moral integrity of the institution.
While false narratives of possible escape might serve the school’s interests in maintaining control and social harmony, and might even offer the pupils some temporary psychological relief and motivation, the ethical implications and potential for long-term harm make this a highly contentious strategy. The ultimate betrayal and emotional devastation that would result from the revelation of these false hopes suggest that, despite any short-term benefits, the circulation of such narratives is morally and ethically problematic. The balance between hope and truth is delicate, and in this context, the deliberate propagation of falsehoods is likely more harmful than beneficial in the long run.
Don’t we encounter the same type of trade-offs in the context of a political biopower? #
Indeed, the dynamics present in Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go” can be seen as a microcosm for the broader concept of political biopower, where the state exerts control over individuals through various forms of regulation, often involving complex trade-offs between control, hope, compliance, and ethical considerations. The term “biopower,” introduced by Michel Foucault, refers to the practice of modern states and their regulation of subjects through an intersection of biological and political governance.
Trade-offs in Political Biopower #
Control vs. Autonomy:
State Control: In the context of political biopower, states often implement policies and narratives that maintain control over the populace. This can include the dissemination of certain ideologies, surveillance, and regulation of bodies and behaviors to ensure conformity and stability.
Individual Autonomy: The trade-off here involves limiting individual autonomy and freedom in favor of broader state control. While this can lead to social order and compliance, it can also result in oppression and the suppression of personal liberties.
Hope vs. Reality:
Narratives of Hope: States may propagate narratives of progress, opportunity, and potential escape from socio-economic constraints to maintain hope among citizens. These narratives can motivate people to work harder and comply with the system, much like the belief in deferrals at Hailsham.
Harsh Realities: The reality, however, may involve systemic inequalities and limited upward mobility. When individuals inevitably confront these harsh truths, the resulting disillusionment can lead to societal unrest and a crisis of legitimacy for the state.
Compliance vs. Resistance:
Psychological Control: By instilling a sense of hope or fear, states can achieve compliance and mitigate resistance. This psychological control can prevent rebellion and maintain social order, analogous to how Hailsham manages the expectations and behaviors of the clones.
Potential for Resistance: Conversely, if the populace becomes aware of the manipulative nature of these narratives, it can lead to increased resistance and demands for transparency and reform. The long-term sustainability of control through deception is precarious.
Ethical Governance vs. Utilitarianism:
Ethical Considerations: Ethical governance involves transparent, honest, and humane treatment of individuals. This approach respects individual dignity and fosters trust between the state and its citizens.
Utilitarian Calculations: Alternatively, a utilitarian approach might justify deceptive or coercive measures for the perceived greater good. While this can lead to short-term gains in compliance and social order, it raises significant ethical concerns and risks undermining the moral authority of the state.
Specific Examples of Political Biopower #
Surveillance States:
- Control Through Surveillance: Modern surveillance states, such as those employing extensive digital monitoring, use biopower to maintain control. The trade-off here is between national security and individual privacy. Citizens may comply with surveillance measures out of fear or a belief in their necessity, but this can lead to a loss of personal freedom and autonomy.
Welfare and Social Programs:
Narratives of Welfare: Welfare states may promote narratives of social safety nets and opportunities for upward mobility. While these programs provide hope and support, the reality may involve bureaucratic inefficiencies and systemic barriers that limit actual mobility.
Economic Realities: The trade-off involves balancing the promise of social support with the economic realities of funding and maintaining these programs, potentially leading to public disillusionment when promises are not fully realized.
Public Health Policies:
- Health and Safety vs. Personal Freedom: In public health, particularly during crises like pandemics, states may enforce strict measures for the collective good. The trade-off is between public health and individual freedoms. Narratives of collective responsibility can foster compliance, but the imposition of restrictions can also lead to resistance and debates over personal autonomy.
The parallels between the control mechanisms in “Never Let Me Go” and the dynamics of political biopower highlight the complex trade-offs involved in governance. Both contexts involve balancing control and compliance with ethical considerations and the potential for resistance. The use of hope and fear as tools of psychological control reflects broader strategies employed by states to maintain order and achieve policy goals, often at the cost of individual autonomy and transparency. The ethical implications of these strategies underscore the importance of humane and transparent governance to maintain trust and legitimacy.
Let us apply this analysis to COVID-19 pandemics? #
Applying the analysis of political biopower to the COVID-19 pandemic reveals a complex interplay of control, compliance, and ethical considerations. The pandemic has necessitated unprecedented measures from governments worldwide, highlighting the trade-offs between public health, individual freedoms, and societal trust.
Control vs. Autonomy #
State Control:
Public Health Measures: Governments implemented lockdowns, social distancing mandates, mask-wearing, and travel restrictions to control the spread of the virus. These measures were essential for public health but involved significant curtailments of personal freedoms.
Surveillance: Enhanced surveillance measures, such as contact tracing and health monitoring apps, were introduced. While effective for tracking virus spread, these measures raised concerns about privacy and state overreach.
Individual Autonomy:
Compliance: Many individuals complied with public health measures out of a sense of civic duty and trust in scientific guidance. Compliance was higher in societies where there was a pre-existing trust in governmental institutions.
Resistance: In contrast, there was significant resistance in some quarters, driven by concerns over personal freedoms, economic impacts, and skepticism about government motives. This resistance highlighted the tension between collective safety and individual rights.
Hope vs. Reality #
Narratives of Hope:
Vaccination Campaigns: Governments and health organizations promoted vaccination as a path to normalcy. The promise of herd immunity and a return to pre-pandemic life motivated many to get vaccinated.
Economic Relief: Economic stimulus packages and social support programs were rolled out to alleviate the financial impact on individuals and businesses, providing hope for economic recovery.
Harsh Realities:
Unequal Access: Despite the hopeful narratives, access to vaccines and economic support was unequal, both within and between countries. This disparity exposed existing inequalities and fueled frustration and distrust.
Prolonged Impact: The prolonged nature of the pandemic, with emerging variants and ongoing restrictions, tempered the initial hopes of a quick return to normalcy. This ongoing uncertainty contributed to pandemic fatigue and disillusionment.
Compliance vs. Resistance #
Psychological Control:
Fear and Responsibility: Governments used narratives of fear (highlighting the dangers of the virus) and responsibility (emphasizing collective duty) to foster compliance. These narratives were crucial in achieving public health goals but had mixed effectiveness depending on cultural and political contexts.
Information Campaigns: Extensive public information campaigns aimed to educate the populace about the virus and the importance of health measures. The effectiveness of these campaigns varied, with misinformation and conspiracy theories undermining official messages.
Potential for Resistance:
Misinformation and Distrust: The spread of misinformation, particularly through social media, fueled resistance to health measures and vaccines. Distrust in government and scientific institutions exacerbated this resistance.
Protests and Civil Disobedience: In some regions, protests against lockdowns and mandates highlighted the resistance to perceived governmental overreach. These movements often framed their arguments around personal liberty and economic survival.
Ethical Governance vs. Utilitarianism #
Ethical Considerations:
Transparency and Trust: Ethical governance during the pandemic involved transparent communication and equitable policies. Where governments were transparent about the reasons for measures and ensured fair distribution of resources, trust was maintained.
Human Rights: Balancing public health with respect for human rights was a constant challenge. Measures perceived as draconian or disproportionate risked eroding public trust and legitimacy.
Utilitarian Calculations #
Greater Good: Many public health measures were justified on utilitarian grounds—maximizing overall health benefits despite individual sacrifices. This approach, while necessary, often led to ethical dilemmas and debates about proportionality.
Economic vs. Health Trade-offs: The trade-off between economic stability and health safety was a significant ethical concern. Policies had to balance immediate economic needs with long-term health outcomes, often leading to difficult decisions.
The COVID-19 pandemic starkly illustrates the dynamics of political biopower. Governments worldwide faced the challenge of managing public health while balancing individual freedoms, fostering compliance, and maintaining ethical governance. The trade-offs between control and autonomy, hope and reality, compliance and resistance, and ethical considerations versus utilitarian calculations underscore the complexities of pandemic management.
Effective governance during such crises requires a nuanced approach that respects individual rights while ensuring collective safety. Transparent communication, equitable policies, and a focus on building and maintaining public trust are crucial for navigating the ethical and practical challenges posed by a global health crisis. The lessons learned from the pandemic can inform future responses to similar emergencies, highlighting the importance of ethical biopower in maintaining societal resilience and cohesion.
Movie “Never Let Me Go” (2010)
