Charlie In Daniel Keyes 'Flowers For Algernon'

Did you know that almost 19 million people participate in clinical trials, but it is impossible to say how many are harmed? A character named Charlie was involved in a test to see if we can artificially improve human intelligence. Some say it was for the good of science, but many others can argue otherwise. The argument has arisen because of the side effects of the operation, the fact that the Ethics of Fieldwork were not followed, and the unfortunate death of Charlie. The short story “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keyes, Scientists performed a operation to possibly triple the IQ of the test subject: Charlie. The doctors had good reason for the operation, but when they chose Charlie as the test subject, it was a not a good decision.
In the …show more content…
An excerpt from the text reads, “ Deterioration progressing. I have become absent-minded. Algernon died two days ago. Dissection shows my predictions were right. His brain had decreased in weight and there was a general smoothing of the cerebral convolutions...“(Keyes 205). The quote expresses how Charlie did indeed become more intelligent, but also how those improvements of Charlie were reversed in the story. Since they were reversed there was almost little if not completely no point in the operation to increase human intelligence artificially. In addition to the reduction of Charlie’s tripled IQ there was no point whatsoever in the operation. It even states in the text, “I must not become emotional. The facts and the results of the experiments are clear, and the more sensational aspects of my own rapid climb cannot obscure the fact that the tripling of intelligence by the surgical technique developed by Dr. Strauss and Nemur must be viewed as having little or no practical applicability to the increase of human intelligence.“ (Keyes 204). The quote shows that even though there was a discovery in science there was still pointless because all that was proven was that the operation can never happen. Someone may argue that there was a contribution made to science because while …show more content…
Strauss and Dr. Nemur wrongly chose Charlie as their test subject because of their impatience and anxiousness, they have sentenced Charlie to a faster death than what have occurred if the operation was not performed. The story states, “Everyone identifies me with Algernon. In a way we’re the first of our kind. They’re all pretending that Algernon’s behavior is not necessarily significant for me. But it’s hard to hide the fact that some other animals who were used in the experiment are showing strange behavior...Algernon died two days ago.“(Keyes 203, 205) This quote implies that Charlie will die because Algernon, the mouse who had the operation also, IQ had dropped and the mouse soon died afterwards. The characters are parallel to each other showing us what will happen to Charlie when something happens to Algernon. Another quote from the text states, “Algernon died two days ago dissection shows my predictions were right. His brain had decreased in weight and there was a general smoothing out of the cerebral convolutions as well as a deepening and broadening of brain fissures.“(Keyes 205) The quote shows that if the doctors had simply waited to see the results of the mouse they would have known that the operation would be a success at first, but then ultimately fail. One may argue that the doctors reasons were justified because they gave Charlie all that he wanted-- to be normal and smart. A quote to support this argument can